National School Walkout: My Child Won’t Be Intimidated Into Silence

National School Walkout: My Child Won’t Be Intimidated Into Silence March 13, 2018

The most sweeping social changes often are sparked by those who are silenced by society. In fact, true change only seems to come when these voices stand defiantly taller than anyone imagined they could.

It has been nearly 20 years since Columbine, and America’s powerful have done exactly nothing to make that an anomaly of the past. In fact, mass shootings are so common these days that we have grown dangerously desensitized to the reality our country faces. As outraged as we are in the aftermath of any given shooting, it all seems to subside as we are quietly lulled into acceptance.

Thankfully, there’s one group of people who are no longer willing to sit back in acceptance: America’s children. Tomorrow across the country, students will leave their classrooms and walk out of school in protest over our nation’s powerful refusing to take action on this life-or-death issue of gun violence. The walkout is scheduled to last 17 minutes; one minute for each of the students recently killed at Stoneman Douglass.

Many schools across the nation see this for the valuable educational opportunity that it is, and are openly supporting students who wish to participate. Other schools however, are providing our kids with an equally valuable civics lesson, as they are threatening disciplinary measures against any student who dares participate in this national expression.

My daughter is a freshman in high school, and her school is among those openly trying to stop students standing in solidarity with their peers across the country.

Last week she brought home a letter from the Superintendent of Schools stating that any student participating in the National Walkout would face disciplinary actions. My face beamed with pride as she handed it to me and said, “Just so you know dad, I’m getting a detention next week.”

I don’t think she even realizes the powerful narrative she so naturally found herself in, nor do I think the school realizes how naturally they set up the most worthy civics lesson I could imagine. The most sweeping and lasting social change is often sparked when the voiceless find one, amplify it with a bullhorn, and use it to call bullshit– and they say it louder when people tell them to get back in their chairs.

Our Superintendent of Schools was quoted in the local newspaper correctly labeling participation in the National Walkout as “civil disobedience,” thus warranting disciplinary measures in her view. What’s most ironic is that it didn’t have to be civil disobedience at all, nor is it in most other schools in my state or across the country. However, by turning this situation into one of civil disobedience, we find that it’s the perfect opportunity for everyone to learn a few lessons– including our Superintendent of Schools. Here is the letter I sent her this morning:

 


unafraid 300Dr. Benjamin L. Corey is a two-time graduate of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary and holds his doctorate from Fuller Theological Seminary. He is also the author of the new book, Unafraid: Moving Beyond Fear-Based Faith, which is available wherever good books are sold.www.Unafraid-book.com.

You can also follow him on Facebook:


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • David

    I dare you to do the same thing in response to the violence exacted by the US military daily against innocent men, women and children in sovereign countries around the world.

  • Timothy Weston

    This year marks the biggest youth movement in about 50 years. The students in Parkview are just starting or are close to legal adulthood. This means they can vote and even run for certain public offices. These students were born into a world where greed consumed them and their peers while those in power either did not stop it or aided it. This is a generation that has had so much pulled from underneath them they have nothing left to lose. They have seen the cycle of a shooting, “thoughts and prayers”, legislative chat about non-solutions, then buried until the next shooting. This time, they decided to break that cycle. No student should ever have to go to school wondering if they or their peers will be at the business end of a madman whose method of rage could have been stopped at the institutional level.

  • I’m guessing you’re unaware I’m a total pacifist and would happily support my daughter in an anti-military protest?

  • Matthew

    Your letter was powerful. You write very well.

  • Realist1234

    It’s a pity something similar didnt happen 5 years ago when 20 toddlers were murdered in their school just before Christmas. And rather ironic that it seems Trump is the one who may actually DO something regarding guns in the US.

    Hopefully some good will finally come of this.

  • Matthew

    I think Trump recently said that there is simply not the political will to do much. He also seems to be more interested in the states trying to solve the problem rather than doing something legislatively at the federal level.

    Sad really …

  • This is what I mean by a self-correcting story– it takes a while for key characters to arrive on the scene who insist the story “isn’t going to end this way.”

  • Greta Holt

    Beautifully written. As a retired teacher, I view the student protest as a dignified response to violence. It is a moment of solidarity. For further solutions to our nation’s gun violence, we must continue to follow the money. Who is benefiting? At the same time, we must decide that our interests are the same: safety for gun owners and non-owners alike.

  • Newton Finn

    This is simply what a good father does to support a child who wants to do the right thing when some cost is involved. “And a little child shall lead them….”

  • David

    Terrific!

  • gloriamarie

    Dear fellow GCTS alumnus: wonderful letter. Your daughter rocks. May this generation of children lead the way to social change, social justice.

  • Timothy Swanson

    Well done. Proud of her and you.

  • Nimblewill

    We had 8 out of 900 walk out today and our principal let them speak their mind. He veered the conversation when one student wanted to turn it into a pro-gun debate. Having said that at least two of the students of the 8 had several discipline referrals for fighting. Why aren’t students protesting real everyday verbal violence against each other? Why aren’t we as adults writing blogs about being kind to one another, teaching students to befriend those who are hurting. It takes little courage to take up a sign and walk and chant. Where the real courage comes in is when students ask the student sitting by themselves at lunch to come sit with them, to befriend those most different that them, I see it from time to time in our school; just random acts of kindness that make real differences in real lives. I would that our sons and daughters were walking toward hurting people in their schools and not just walking out!

  • Mr. James Parson

    Wow.

    Can’t we fix one problem at a time rather than zero?

    ~~~

    I would love to see 900 walk out and the see 900 show up for detention.

  • “What my daughter will learn through this real-life lesson is far greater than what she will learn in the classroom during that short period. Instead of reading about how society’s powerful will threaten and intimidate the powerless into quiet submission, she will experience it. More importantly: instead of reading about those brave individuals who changed the course of American history because they refused to quietly remain in their seats, she will become one of them. Our story is only a self-correcting one when there are people like her in it.”

    Isn’t it funny how much we love to read about, and celebrate, the historical figures who have challenged and overcome the ills and evils of society, but are far less enthusiastic about those who attempt to do so in our own time. We applaud the courage of those whose story is already told, but too often try to silence those intent on writing new stories. But as the author intimates, unless we teach our children (by example!) to stand up and speak out, our story will *not* self-correct. And we will all be the poorer for it.

  • Larry TheKeyboardist Blake

    This millennial applauds your daughter’s actions, and your willingness to support her.

  • Chuck Johnson

    It takes little courage to take up a sign and walk and chant. -Nimblewill

    Stop being so dishonest.
    It takes little honesty, insight, courage or caring to post an idea like the one I’ve quoted.

  • Chuck Johnson

    Technology is making such public protests possible and practical.
    People are becoming more connected to each other than ever.

  • Nimblewill

    Dang Chuck! I hit a sore spot. Many of the people who march don’t have a clue what they are marching for. They are simply followers. I think you are being dishonest.

  • Nimblewill

    One has immediate results, the other we have been fighting about for years. In one there’s no debate, the other had divided the country.

  • Nimblewill

    We honored the 8, We would have honored the 900.

  • Bones

    You are a Grade A idiot….But then people like you just forget about kids getting shot like at Sandy Hook.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c2b6c8410b020231a2be36d255829b10426b3d21f9108a16685789eb4d0af7d7.jpg

  • Bones
  • Bones

    You mean like after sandy hook.

    No amount of killing little kids will change the ideology of people like you.

    It really does show how sick people like you, and the US culture, are.

  • Bones

    Trump’s answer is the same as the NRA’s and evangelical Christians.

    More guns!!!!!

  • Nimblewill

    This is prime example of what I am talking about. Name calling will never solve anything. Don’t you realize that name calling divides and as long as we are divided absolutely nothing is going to be done about gun control, which I’m for by the way. Adults can have civil conversations so I don’t suspect that we can teach our kids to. This is the point that a young lady brought up yesterday. She didn’t feel like she could talk to anyone. Again our principal steered the conversation away from a young man who wanted to talk about 2nd amendment rights. We are having intelligent conversations with our kids. Let’s me and you try to do the same. Here’s what kids know. They know they are hurting and being hurt. Loving on those kids is not the work of idiots. Stay in One Peace!

  • Bones

    Great letter.

    Thankfully my kids don’t have to demonstrate against gun laws and school shootings.

  • Nimblewill

    And I’m happy about that. We didn’t dismiss our 8. I think you really misunderstand what I am trying to say. I’ve spent 28 years being an advocate for kids. What are you doing for them? It a serious question. And what exactly is the ideology that you think I have?

  • Bones

    “Other schools however, are providing our kids with an equally valuable civics lesson, as they are threatening disciplinary measures against any student who dares participate in this national expression.

    That’s bs.

    Don’t give me any more bs about Christian bakers and free speech.

  • Bones

    Yes, people like you have solved absolutely nothing. Instead you want to have ‘conversations’ until the issue goes away ….and then the next shooting…..

    After every shooting you just dismiss it. Their blood is easily forgotten.

    Ffs, it’s people like you who divide the country.

    People who sit on their hands while kids are getting shot.

    I live in a country where most people recognised after 35 innocent people were murdered that gun restrictions were a good thing without people like you being divisive.

  • Bones

    I’ve worked with kids for over 30 years.

    Advocating and educating them.

    But then I live in a country where kids aren’t shot at school and people just try to dismiss it, like you have.

    And yeah you show your attitude towards kids by patronisingly saying they have no idea what they are protesting about.

    You’ve got to be fricking kidding me.

    And you call yourself an advocate for kids.

    You shouldn’t be anywhere near them.

  • Bones

    “No amount of killing little kids will change the ideology of people like you.”

    Response……”And I’m happy about that. ”

    What a pathetic piece of humanity.

    How is this person allowed anywhere near children?

  • $144948586

    Bones:
    Doesn’t like that kids are silenced in schools.
    Ridicules those who don’t like that 1) their kids are forced in to these schools, 2) they’re forced to pay for the silence.

    Hypocrite.

  • $144948586

    “We see time and time again…those who hold the keys to power having little motivation to do what is good, just, right, or necessary, as it often comes at a high price to them.”
    And yet, Corey supports the State determining what is good, just, right and necessary when it favors his judgment. He supports the right to freedom of religion when it comes to giving illegal immigrants water but not that of a baker who believes the certain use of his services (not anyone else’s) is damnable.

    Good letter; I just wish you believed it.

  • Chuck Johnson

    “Many of the people who march don’t have a clue what they are marching for. They are simply followers.”

    In the context of the repeated mass murders in our public schools, and in the context of Benjamin’s present essay, you are trolling.

  • Nimblewill

    No Chuck I’m not trolling. I listened to our kids yesterday. 4 spoke and not one was protesting gun laws or gun control. They talked about suicide, they talked about honoring the 17 who were slain, and as I said before one wanted to talk about his 2nd Amendment rights. He was stopped.

  • Tim
  • Tim

    I don’t think this has anything to do with freedom of religion. It has to do with doing what’s right, even at cost to ourselves.

  • $144948586

    Tim, the issue is that Corey supports the use of State when it agrees with him in what is “good, just, right and necessary”.

  • Nimblewill

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=33&v=3-W7jEhoPlc

    At a neighboring county! Notice the kids switching sides.

  • Chuck Johnson

    . . . but not that of a baker who believes the certain use of his services (not anyone else’s) is damnable.-Josh

    Freedom of religion is promoted as the law of the land when the religious practices do not violate the law.
    Much leeway is given to the religionists.
    Children in the USA die or are injured for life when religious parents deny the child medical treatment. In some states, this is legally permissible.

    Any time that religious practices come into conflict with the law of the land, the court systems are called upon to give a judgement. Sometimes the ruling is in favor of the religious practice, sometimes it is in favor of the law of the land.
    This is nothing new or special.
    I see no hypocrisy in Benjamin choosing which laws he supports and which he opposes.

  • Tim

    No, that’s YOUR issue with him. It doesn’t really have anything directly to do with this post, specifically.

  • $144948586

    No, the issue is that Corey is fighting against the very thing he’s already supported the State doing: suppress the rights of individuals. He supports it, until it disagrees with him. Certainly, there is a valid position one could hold on the issue, but Corey’s is not it.

    It’s hypocritical.

  • $144948586

    “I see no hypocrisy in Benjamin choosing which laws he supports and which he opposes…

    Sometimes the ruling is in favor of the religious practice, sometimes it is in favor of the law of the land.”
    You see no hypocrisy in his supporting both sides of the law?
    Then you’re blind.

  • Nimblewill

    The wrath of man does not produce the righteousness of God!

  • $144948586

    Why not just ban public schools? That’s where it appears the vast majority of these shootings occur.

  • Bones

    We don’t have shootings at any schools over here.

    Yet again, you can’t see the forest for the trees in your anti-public schools vendetta.

    You’d much rather see education just be for the rich.

  • Bones

    Says the hypocrite who supports migrants being rounded up.

  • Bones

    Yes we’ve been over this.

    That you support discrimination is your problem which you can’t subject everyone else to.

    That’s what it all boils down to.

  • Bones

    You’re the hypocrite.

    The one who moans about migrants and homosexuals.

    Funny how these rightards found their libertarian sides AFTER it was no longer legal to round up gay people.

  • Bones

    This is from the hypocrite who said nothing about gays and migrants being rounded up and who knows sfa about the role of government.

    Yet bleats when Christians can’t discriminate against gay people.

    You’re a complete and utter hypocrite.

    And a disgrace.

  • Bones

    We had 2 million students rally against bullying today because of the death of one student from suicide.

    Yet 17 die in one shooting in your country and you’re like what the f*** would they know.

    Your kind have done nothing to stop school shootings. in fact, you help perpetuate it.

  • Bones

    Yeah that’s absolutely irrelevant when people like you do nothing after 6 year olds get massacred.

    Their blood and god’s wrath be on you.

  • $144948586

    “We don’t have shootings at any schools over here.”
    And yet there are more guns in Australia than before the massacre:
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-28/australia-has-more-guns-than-before-port-arthur-massacre/7366360
    #embarrassing

    “You’d much rather see education just be for the rich.”
    This is what we have now; I’d much rather education be affordable.

  • $144948586

    Proof?

  • $144948586

    “That you support discrimination is your problem”
    You are damn right I do; except when the government does it.

    Besides, you discriminate anyway. Why didn’t you have children with a guy? Because you, by being hetero, are discriminatory.

  • $144948586

    “Funny how these rightards found their libertarian sides AFTER it was no longer legal to round up gay people.”
    Well, to be fair, I wasn’t alive then, so…

    “The one who moans about migrants and homosexuals.”
    Proof?

  • $144948586

    “This is from the hypocrite who said nothing about gays and migrants being rounded up and who knows sfa about the role of government.”
    Who’s rounding up gays and migrants that I don’t criticize?

  • Nimblewill

    If you and I were face to face we would be having a very different conversation. I’ve done a terrible job of getting my point across. I really do want the same thing that you do. I simply see it as starting by being kind to those who have the potential to do others harm. I am for gun control, waiting periods for background checks, limiting rounds. I’m sorry that I have offended you and done such a poor job of expressing myself. Thanks for helping me see that. Peace!

  • (((islandbrewer)))

    “More Kids, Less Fewer Guns

    I’m sorry. I couldn’t restrain myself.

  • seashell

    You see no hypocrisy in his supporting both sides of the law? Then you’re blind.

    Like all people, sometimes the State (which is made up of people) can be right and sometimes it can be wrong. To write off willfully as bad everything the State does, is worse than blind. Your stance that the State is always wrong shows a total lack of good judgement and the absence of critical thinking. The blind are better off than you.

  • Bones

    Oh dear…..you can’t refute that we don’t go around shooting kids at schools and we have bans on semi autos and limits on magazine sizes,.. something you hate.

    From your own article

    “He said the 1996 firearms laws resulted in a “gun swap” as banned rapid-fire rifles and shotguns were replaced with newly imported single-shot firearms.”

    Oh and getting a gun licence is a bit of a bitch here. You need a darn good reason besides I’m scared of da black man. Oh and it takes months to be approved.

    https://www.police.qld.gov.au/forms/weaponslicensing.asp

    #embarrassing

    Education is affordable…unless you want to send your child to a rich private school who only take the students they want. #embarrassing

  • Bones

    Lol, you are an idiot.

  • Bones

    “Proof?”

    Is in your own words.

    That you’re embarrassed by them is your own problem.

  • Bones

    That would be your hero Trump.

    You’re also a hypocrite for using government resources eg roads, sewage, police and railing against them.
    Like I said there are islands you can move to.

    But I doubt your family would like them.

  • Bones

    There won’t be any peace while kids are sacrificed at school on the altar of your country’s gun laws.

  • Bones

    Some people need to get a life.

  • $144948586

    Either people have the right to freedom of religious expression or not.
    Corey chooses to straddle that fence, by his own admission.

    “sometimes the State (which is made up of people) can be right and sometimes it can be wrong.”
    The State is always the most inefficient, therefor it is always wrong.

  • $144948586

    Quantify it all you want; more guns, Bones. More guns.

    “Education is affordable”
    Then why do schools consistently push for more “federal funding” and increased property taxes?

  • $144948586

    “You’re also a hypocrite for using government resources eg roads, sewage, police and railing against them.”
    I guess it’s hypocritical that Jews used those ovens that they denounced.

  • seashell

    The State is always the most inefficient, therefor it is always wrong.

    Oh for goddess’ sake. You just proved my point. Efficiency is important only in theoretical economics and even then it’s never perfect. A State that consists of 3 separate branches sharing power is never going to be efficient and no right is absolute.

    ‘Therefor’ is spelled therefore.

  • $144948586

    “Efficiency is important only in theoretical economics and even then it’s never perfect.”
    That’s certainly not true.
    Wal-Mart didn’t become Wal-Mart because it was “second-most” efficient.
    Amazon didn’t become Amazon because it was “second-most” efficient; that’s also why it’s now killing Wal-Mart.

    “A State that consists of 3 separate branches sharing power is never going to be efficient”
    Thank you.

    “and no right is absolute.”
    So then there’s no basis for law; just some that government deems to have rights and others that government deems does not….I guess the Jews didn’t have their rights violated.

    “‘Therefor’ is spelled therefore.”
    Thank you, Dr. Webster.

  • Nimblewill

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Bq_H1ci9ec

    This is what I was talking about. There won’t be any peace till Jesus comes. He’s coming all the time though!

  • Bones

    Jews used Auschwitz?

    Haven’t heard that conspiracy theory before.

  • Bones

    “There won’t be any peace till Jesus comes.”

    That’s a copout.

    And gun control is introduced…..

    Your country will never be great while you ignore the slaughter of the innocent which betrays the message of the commercial. You will not stand with those injured and slaughtered in the name of gun rights.

    Sandy Hook….never forget…. though those who want nothing to do with gun restrictions want us to.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/580811fb76f63c19a4f168a571759e188987701a47db1d71be25ed2a5fbf68c0.jpg

  • Julie Mattison

    And does your hypothetical baker support adultery, intimate partner abuse, divorce and child molestation? Because if his checklist of who gets to get a wedding cake from him doesn’t include screening for those should-be-troubling-to-his-“christianity” issues, he is not conscientious, just a hypocrite.

  • $144948586

    “Jews used Auschwitz?”
    That’s mostly all that was available to them at the time; just like those roads and sewage you accuse me of hypocritically using.

    Just goes to show, “use of” does not imply “approval of”.

  • $144948586

    “…he is not
    conscientious, just a hypocrite.”
    So? That still doesn’t mean it’s not his religion and his right to exercise it as he see’s fit (so long has he’s being non-aggressive).

    Keep in mind, he’s not banning anyone from buying a cake. He’s just banning them from buying from him. The difference matters.

  • Bones

    Lol….using roads and sewage is the same as gassing Jews.

    Just shows what sort of a f###ed up worldview you have.

    As I said you can always move instead of bleating about government, though your family wont like it.

  • $144948586

    “Lol….using roads and sewage is the same as gassing Jews.”
    You’re the one who equated “the use of” with “the approval of”.

    Perhaps you’d not have to be aghast at the implication of your equivocation if your statement wasn’t so asinine.

  • seashell

    You’re comparing government to commercial enterprises. The two have different motives and priorities, as well as purposes. Running the government like WalMart or real estate transactions does not lead to effective outcomes or efficiency.

    I take it you think spell check is inefficient also.

  • $144948586

    “The two have different motives and priorities, as well as purposes.”
    Priorities, no. Both are interested in serving people.
    Motives, you are damn straight they do…one has political motives amd kills a lot of peopld; the other just sells to those that want and not to those that don’t want.

    “Running the government like WalMart or real estate transactions does not lead to effective outcomes or efficiency.”
    Then why would running WalMart like WalMart be effective and efficient in outcome?

  • Bones

    Josh thinks all forms of government are represented by Nazi Germany.

    That’s why he lives in a Republic with a government………..

  • Bones

    Yep I’ll quantify it.

    From the actual report…..

    “This increase must be seen in context. Australia’s population grew by five million in the same period, so per-capita firearm ownership remains 23% lower than it was before Port Arthur.

    But here’s the thing: fewer Australians now own guns. Since 1988, the proportion of households with a firearm fell by 75%.

    The reason? Those who already possess several guns have bought more. Until recently, the average Australian shooter owned three to five firearms. The same people now keep a larger collection, and a proportion of their guns continue to leak into the illicit market.”

    https://sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2016/04/28/australia-s-gun-numbers-climb.html

    I’ll quantify it some more…..

    Number of school shootings in Australia = 0

    Number of teachers needed to be armed in Australia = 0

    Number of mass shootings in Australia since 96 = 0

    Number of mass shootings in 15 years BEFORE gun control = 13

    Oh and conservatives keep cutting funding….and the costs of special education keeps going up….
    There’s also this thing called inflation…..

  • Bones

    But you enjoy using government services even if his own government is out to kill you.

    I can only assume you live in a survivalist compound in the mountains.

  • Bones

    Well it would be if comparing using roads and sewage is even remotely comparable to putting Jews in ovens.

    You have to be pretty stupid to make that comparison. You are using government services all all the time.

    If you don’t like it, then piss off to some island because we’re sick of your hypocritical whining.

  • $144948586

    According to Bones, crowding out effects don’t exist. So to use government provided things is also to approve of them. Thus, the Jews approved of gas chambers and ovens, according to Bones. Cambodiand also approved of the killing fields. And Chinese political prisoners approve of having their organs removed for the bourgeoisie. That is, according to Bones.

  • $144948586

    You did it, Bones. You did it.

    “You are using government services all all the time.”
    So were the Jews, until they couldn’t any longer.

  • $144948586

    “and the costs of special education keeps going up”
    Perhaps that’s why they cut funding; this speaks to ghe inefficiency of the school system.

  • seashell

    Well, Bones, I admit that interest in Nazi Germany and how it became NG has had a sudden revival in the US, but not from the viewpoint that it’s already here.

    Why do you suppose someone thinks that this is a forum for misunderstandings of how government works and a general hatred toward it? Isn’t there an Ihategovt.com forum somewhere that can at least provide allies for these people?

  • seashell

    I can’t teach you crash courses in political science and economics in 3 sentences. Going to schools of higher education provide an amazing amount of information on these subjects. Reading books by credible authors have been known to educate people, also. I recommend either or both.

  • $144948586

    I’m not interested in preaching to the choir, seashell–unlike you and Bones and the ilk here that revel in their own hatred.

  • $144948586

    “Going to schools of higher education provide an amazing amount of information on these subjects.”
    You assume I don’t have an undergrad in mathematics nor a master in economics, both graduating summa cum laude?

    “Reading books by credible authors have been known to educate people, also.”
    You assume I don’t have 15-20 books on my nightstand from “credible authors” as it is?

    Seashell, you can provide more than 3 sentences; we have that space. My guess is though that you’ve been blowing smoke so you’ll retreat instead of waking up.

    Here’s a slow clap:
    https://media.giphy.com/media/gRxjhVNfFgqI0/giphy.gif

  • $144948586

    No, Bones.
    I think idiotic claims like “being forced to give your money to the mob” is the same as “enjoying giving money to the mob” are easily refuted by Nazi Germany.

    I mean your claim was, “you use these services, therefore you agree with (nay, enjoy) them.”

  • Matthew

    Have you read Joseph Stiglitz or Paul Krugman? If so … briefly … what did you think?

  • Bones

    You post the most idiotic garbage out.

    Using sewage and roads is like gassing Jews.

    Go f### of to an island and stop your whinging..

    You won’t though.

    You enjoy your government perks too much…..you know….like gassing Jews.

    Moron.

  • $144948586

    I began “Return of Depression Economics” by Krugman years ago, but couldn’t get through it; at that point I had already realized he spews a bunch of tripe. They basically say the same things that all the textbooks approved by government schools and written by them and their friends do: government has the answer (and is never the cause).

    As for what I think? You write a book about inequality, do nothing about it, and win a Nobel prize.

    EDIT:
    Oh, I almost forgot, I also had to research the claims made from Krugman concerning the rise of inequality and his solutions…I’ll have to find it, but he readily admits: you set the welfare level and it destroys the potential for jobs that could offered for a rate at or below that level….this is the anti-minimum wage argument as well, btw.

  • $144948586

    “You enjoy your government perks too much…..you know….like gassing Jews.”
    You made the claim.

  • Bones

    It really shows that these people have no idea at all and use the worst of abuses to label every government the same. (Like can we do that with Christians). Neither do they understand why we have governments at all – (ultimately it was for protection from other groups of individuals who just took over the weak)

    In fact I was just teaching my son how my country Australia became a federation ie it followed the US, had different train gauges for each state, each state had its own army and each state had its own taxation.

    The big kicker was a united Australia was easier to defend.

    It was for convenience and protection.

    To Josh though it is about gassing Jews. (Who btw were defeated by other governments)

  • Bones

    Yes having special needs students is inefficient.

    Gee, you’re a prick.

  • Bones

    The Jews still use government derpy.

    Maybe you’ve heard of Israel.

    Jews see your analogy for the complete and utter dishonest stupidity it is.

  • Bones

    And governments made your country what it is today. Ffs comparing modern western democracies with dictatorships. how stupid can you get?

    Is the US killing Jews and political prisoners?

    Guess what would happen if you didn’t have government?

    You’d be invaded by the first strong man and his gang to come along.

    That’s called history derp.

  • $144948586

    Then you build a school that works best for them; private institutions have been doing this.
    http://lmgtfy.com/?q=private+schools+for+special+needs

  • $144948586

    “And governments made your country what it is today.”
    Non-sense, free enterprise made our country what it is today.

    Governments, like all third-world nations (and first world nations who fain “care” about those poor), keep the people poor.

    “Guess what would happen if you didn’t have government?”
    Jews wouldn’t have been killed by an elected person named Hitler.

  • $144948586

    “Jews see your analogy for the complete and utter dishonest stupidity it is.”
    Would you call God dishonestly stupid?

    He didn’t want them to have one in the first place. 1 Sam 8.

  • Bones

    No they don’t derpy.

    Private schools send special ed kids to the government schools.

    They cost too much money.

  • $144948586

    Also, for the record, the cost of education (special or not) keeps going up:
    https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/wp-content/uploads/Cato-tot-cost-scores-Coulson-Sept-2012-sm.gif

    Admittedly, I didn’t see “special education” when I responded, so perhaps I do sound like a prick. But, that doesn’t change the fact that the public school system is inefficient–PARTICULARLY in regards to special needs.

  • Bones

    No….you made the stupid analogy.

    You enjoy your government perks…..like gassing Jews.

  • $144948586

    “Private schools send special ed kids to the government schools.”
    That link immediately shows private institutions which focus on special needs.

  • $144948586

    You argued the basic point:
    “You use the services, er go you enjoy them.”

  • Bones

    Says the guy who hates gays, migrants and everyone really.

  • $144948586

    Actually, I want them to live freely.

  • Bones

    No wonder you don’t know shit.

    Go out and get a job.

  • Bones

    Bs government made it what it is today.

    It’s people like you that defend slavery. There’s good ol free enterprise.

    And you know f*** all as to how capitalism raped the third world.

    Jews have been and would have been killed by Christians banding together to take their land – Christians like you.

    You really are a complete and utter moron.

  • Matthew

    Thanks Josh.

  • Bones

    They already were derpy……They had been under different forms of government by the time the kings came around.

    You can’t even read the Bible.

    How stupid are you?

  • seashell

    That’s a good looking guy. Thanks!

  • $144948586

    Lol, I work 40-50 hours a week too.

  • $144948586

    “It’s people like you that defend slavery. There’s good ol free enterprise.”
    Slaves were sold to British mercantilists (which we’re directed primarily by government). You might be aware of that most famous one, what’s the name of that tea company again?
    I don’t defend slavery (except in the case of voluntary contract), because I’m a product of the Enlightenment. Thus I don’t support forcing people to work for you anytime of the year against their will, let alone 3-4 months which is what taxation is–you do though, slavery supporter.

    “And you know f*** all as to how capitalism raped the third world.”
    Please enlighten me.

  • $144948586

    It says it right there, Bones.
    Judges were not the same as politicians–and you can have such societal order/courts in a non-government system.

  • seashell

    It really shows that these people have no idea at all and use the worst of abuses to label every government the same. (Like can we do that with Christians). Neither do they understand why we have governments at all – (ultimately it was for protection from other groups of individuals who just took over the weak)

    Well said. As Hobbes claimed of pre-government life, it was “…solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short.”

    Speaking of efficiency though, didn’t the Germans gas the Jews efficiently?

  • seashell

    “And governments made your country what it is today.”
    Non-sense, free enterprise made our country what it is today.

    Your cart is before the horse. The government created the conditions necessary for the markets to thrive. Continuing with my Hobbes kick today, he notes that pre-government “…there is no place for Industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain; and consequently no Culture of the Earth; no Navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by Sea; no commodious Building…”

  • $144948586

    So people, in their incredible wisdom, said “well, I’d love to build a boat…but it’s impossible without first electing a king who can then force minions to work for me and chop lumber. But since we have no king, we don’t even have trinkets to trade. Since we have no king, we have no wells built to pull up fresh water. Since we have no king, we can’t even farm. Since we have no king, we can’t devise ways to kill animals. Since we have no king, we can’t do anything.

    So, we will initiate a king from among the people. They will cast their votes, but, WAIT A MINUTE, how on earth did we develop language? WE HAVE NO KING?!?!”

  • Bones

    There already were governments derpy.

    They were a theocracy under moses which evolved into the leadership of the Judges.

    It says so right there.

  • $144948586

    Social order is not the same thing as a taxing government for fear of prison, Bones.
    People work for ordered companies every day, no thanks to government.
    That being said, you also weren’t forced to be a citizen of the community of Israel during this period.
    When people are free, order happens. Under oppressive order, freedom to act is taken away–this is government.

  • Ron McPherson

    Private schools on their own would never be able to meet the need for the special needs population. Cost too much and doesn’t provide return on investment. Private schools like to often tout that their academic achievement exceed those of public schools. That’s how they compete. But it’s because they can control their population; public schools educate all and so the testing population becomes skewed from the start. Further, many special needs children require a single staff member to be with them the entire school day. The cost of equipment and personnel to sufficiently meet the needs of those students are astronomical. Unless public schools meet those needs (the costs of which can be somewhat diluted through economies of scale), then the needs ultimately won’t get met. The tuition at private schools would balloon. Guess what would happen then? The parents of those kids not requiring special help would pull their kids out of that school and find one with lower tuition rates and higher school-wide academic achievement, leaving the parents of special education kids holding the bag, ultimately forcing the parents on their own to foot the bill.

  • Ron McPherson

    Unless you think the government is in business to make a profit like private business, then your argument will never stand on its own. The goal of private business is to make money, the goal of government is to provide service.

  • Ron McPherson

    Here’s an example. If a department store in my area is not turning a profit or worse, losing money, then the owners close it and stop the bleeding (they don’t keep it open just because they’re in it to provide a service to their customers lol). If the “return on investment” of the local school isn’t “profitable”, the government doesn’t just close it and send all the students back to their homes. Government and private business are not even remotely in operation for the same purpose.

  • $144948586

    “the goal of government is to provide service.”
    Let me ask you something, how does government afford to provide service?

  • Ron McPherson

    Primarily through taxation and secondarily through user service fees

  • $144948586

    So if I may continue:
    Do you know the ratio of taxation vs service fees?
    According to PBS, some 93% is accounted for by taxation:
    http://www.pbs.org/wnet/wherewestand/blog/finance-how-do-we-fund-our-schools/197/

    Would you like to provide a better number?

  • Ron McPherson

    I would have thought more than 93% actually

  • $144948586
  • Matthew

    They do what you are against, Josh, they tax :-)

  • $144948586

    Is that so, Ron?

  • Ron McPherson

    Depends. Could raise taxes, or could rely solely on natural growth of existing tax base, or could generate more user fees if possible, or could cut expenses, or could be a combination of some or all the above

  • $144948586

    “or could cut expenses”
    How could they do this?

  • Nimblewill

    https://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/health/petrol-sniffing

    What are you doing about these kids dying? Why aren’t you wanting to ban gasoline?

  • Ron McPherson

    To secure more funds, public school systems can either lobby for increasing the tax base or instead cut expenses like reduce teacher pay (not a great way to secure good talent), don’t provide bus transportation (get ready for terrible attendance, limit food service support, cut teaching positions (then you would have grossly overcrowded classrooms), pass all insurance coverage cost on to employees, eliminate all elective courses like no chorus or band or art or drivers education, etc (offer just core subjects like math, science, ELA, social studies), don’t purchase new textbooks (just use the used ones with no covers on them), reduce administrative overhead positions (make remaining payroll clerks, accountants, HR staff, IT support staff, etc work excessive hours to pick up the duties of those who were laid off), cut custodial staff and just let the facilities stay dirty, cut landscaping costs (let the grass grow), etc.

    Everybody however wants to maintain these services at their local schools, but many don’t want to pay taxes to do it. Cut costs at the school down the road but not the one where my kid goes.

  • $144948586

    Aren’t you the one who said, “the goal of government is to provide service.”
    Why would a business do any differently?

  • Ron McPherson

    The goal of government IS to provide service. But when folks don’t want to pay taxes, then there is no choice left but to cut services. So you cut electives at the school because you don’t have the money to pay the teacher. Then folks grumble cause their kid can’t take band anymore. It’s always about cut someone else’s service. In other words, cut costs at central office. So you lay a payroll clerk off. Then there is a glitch in teacher paychecks cause the people there are now working 80 hours a week to pick up the slack caused by lower workforce. Then people complain that government is incompetent cause they can’t get teachers paid. BUT DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES RAISE MY TAXES!!!!

  • $144948586

    “BUT DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES RAISE MY TAXES!!!!”
    Why must they raise taxes higher in the first place? Why do their costs per student keep going up as illustrated by the graphic earlier?

  • Ron McPherson

    Aside from annual inflation, the costs have risen to expanded services far beyond what they were 40-50 years ago. The evil govt passed laws requiring public schools to provide education services to special needs kids, enacted in the early 70’s. Other services by the evil govt are given to ESL students, helping those kids where English is a second language (interventions are needed for obvious reasons)..

    Increased population requires additional bus services, higher maintenance needs at schools, and additional facility capacity (debt costs for major additions and new schools because kids need a classroom to sit in).

    Food service costs have risen up due to providing breakfasts for kids that was not there years prior. The evil government understood that the school was often the only place where poorer kids got a balanced meal.

    Additional academic interventions have been put in place in an effort to help students suffering from learning disabilities. None of this comes free.

    Advanced placement courses have been added to give students a jump start on college to help them be successful where they otherwise wouldn’t. Electives courses and extra curricular activities have grown because the evil govt came to understand that children can have a more well rounded education and contribute better socially when they do something under than reading, writing, and arithmetic.

    And for what it’s worth, few if any of those things can be directly correlated to higher test scores. That’s why it’s pointless to try and link per pupil spending to academic achievement.

  • $144948586

    Can you please provide numbers rgarding the different cost increases for schooling. Heres one; that graphic shows cost have practically increased $8-9k per student per year.
    According to the NEA, roughly 13 percent of the student population receives special education services at an additional cost of about 8k per student receiving it. This translates to less than 2k per student per year additional. Can you explain the pther 6-7k? Please, quantify the numbers.

  • $144948586

    Also, those numbers were already adjusted for inflation.

  • seashell

    It’s interesting that you and Ron brought up public schools. I live in a city that provides public schools separately from the county. Our taxes are higher than much of the state (but not unaffordable), and much of that is due to the excellence of the schools. People from surrounding areas that voted down higher taxes were using friends addresses in order to send their kids to our schools, so much so that the school board had to institute strict methods of checking addresses and occupants. As a result, housing in our city seldom goes up for sale, as word gets out and the houses are sold before they can get to the open market. The city also reserves a proportion of housing for low income families and seniors, resulting in a diverse population of adults and children. Does any of this sound like an evil government?

  • Ron McPherson

    “Can you please provide numbers rgarding the different cost increases for schooling.”

    I would have to research that, but don’t have the inclination too. You’re more than welcome too though.

    “ that graphic shows cost have practically increased $8-9k per student per year.”

    Um, no that’s impossible. Not sure how you’re getting that number since the National per pupil spending average is only about $11k-$12k annually?

  • $144948586

    I’ll be glad to deal with exceptions to the rule after we finish discussing the general rule of average costs.

  • $144948586

    It’s right there in the Cato chart which is from the NEA.
    https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/wp-content/uploads/Cato-tot-cost-scores-Coulson-Sept-2012-sm.gif

    Since 1970, after adjusting for inflation, real total costs K-12 have increased over $100k per student. That’s an increase of $8.5k per year per student.

    As for your 11-12k number, the closest I can find of that number is from here:
    http://www.governing.com/gov-data/education-data/state-education-spending-per-pupil-data.html

    Which is at least from 2015 (and comes from US Census Bureau, besides the total cost per student is $143k.
    This is still an increase of $6-7k. Now, as we’ve seen only 13% of the student population receives special education.
    https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgg.asp
    This means that, beyond $1-2k in special education costs per student per year, you’ve got to explain $4-5k.

    Of course this also says that you have two government organizations who can’t agree on costs for their school system.
    #inefficiency

    “I would have to research that, but don’t have the inclination too.”
    I note this attitude; you’re all so willing to raise taxes on people, but you refuse to explain the costs motivating the tax increases. i think at the very least you owe the taxpayer that.

    “You’re more than welcome too though.”
    I’m not the one telling others they must pay up or I’ll send in my cronies with guns and take their homes.

  • Ron McPherson

    “…you’re all so willing to raise taxes on people, but you refuse to explain the costs motivating the tax increases. i think at the very least you owe the taxpayer that.”

    What a load of crap. I’m not advocating raising your taxes because I don’t even know where you live. I’m no longer in public education finance Josh, that’s why I have no inclination to do your research for you. . And when I was, in public school finance. we were very transparent to the constituency. We posted all 900 freakin line items to the budget. And we also explained where each of the dollars went to the various schools and departments. We printed hard copies, posted it to the website.

    I listed several reasons why costs per student have increased over the last 4 decades and why test scores have not. Special education students and ESL students are included in the exams where before they were not. I was merely giving you reasons for why it’s not always helpful to try and draw a correlation between spending and academic achievement. That’s all.

    We get it. You hate the govt. you think it’s all evil. You’re pissed that you pay taxes. We get it. I’ve given you valid reasons on why spending has increased. It’s still not good enough for you though.

    Private schools and for profit businesses cannot provide these services at the cost of non profit govt. Anybody can see that because of profit margins. So, if you want to do away with public education and leave it in the hands of capitalism, then just know many of the services I mention will vanish. They don’t provide a sufficient return on investment. You can’t have both the services and a low cost to boot. One has to go. Since we know you don’t like anyone telling you to pony up, then the only thing left is the assumption that you’re ok with cutting services.

    I grew weary of defending govt services and finally got out of it. Spent day after day defending its existence to people like you who think all the govt is good for us to waste their precious dollars. Literally had a lady point blank tell me we could balance the budget if not for those special ed kids. She was fine with kicking them to the curb. You sound like you would have gotten along great with her. And while we’re at it, stop feeding the poor kids too. That way we can cut food service workers and save another buck. And kick out the ESL students who are trying to learn English. That’s what they get for having the audacity to be born with parents who immigrated here looking for a better life.

  • $144948586

    “Special education students and ESL students are included in the exams
    where before they were not. I was merely giving you reasons for why it’s
    not always helpful to try and draw a correlation between spending and
    academic achievement.”
    I wasn’t; I was merely pointing out the 100% increase in total costs and how special ed is a small portion of it.
    Therefore, it begs the question: what other expenses are driving the cost?

    “You sound like you would have gotten along great with her. And while we’re at it, stop feeding the poor kids too.”
    Great job attacking my character to distract from the fact that you’ve got bupkus to explain the other costs–the costs which tax payers are complaining about: like the heavy admin required for public schools because they got more than one public finance manager or some other unnecessary position.
    Instead people say, “You want to raise my taxes? Why are your costs so high?” To which apologists like you say, “You special-ed hater, I bet you’d rather force them to live on the streets and throw out all the poor kids and those Mexican ones!”

    It’s people like you that makes me not want my kids in public education. I raise a question about the inefficiency and high costs and PERHAPS that things could be done better, and I’m accused by the staff of being a bigot. Unbelievable.

    So yes, I’ll demand that you prove your need for a tax increase to justify the high spending. You unwelcome public workers who think my money just grows on trees. Until then, I’m waiting for the explanation.

    “It’s still not good enough for you though.”
    You were in finance; I’m in finance too. The first rule is that we must be able to give a cost estimation, which you haven’t. You’ve given reasons but nothing quantified. That’s poor finance, worthy of a government position, but not the private sector…any wonder why the government sector is the most inefficient? “A billion here and a billion there, pretty soon you’re talking about real money.”–A politician, of course.

  • Bones

    Supplying petrol to minors is an offence.

    Regular unleaded fuel banned in select NT communities in bid to stamp out petrol sniffing

    http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-19/fuel-ban-to-battle-sniffing/7185258

    No doubt you’d be more worried about your own rights to sniff petrol then whats happeningvto kids.

  • Bones

    Dude, I doubt you even have a job to pay taxes.

    And your contempt for special ed kids is all for see.

    I got out of private education because of the blatant hypocrisy of people like you who are all about image.

    Thankfully no one gives a f### about what hypocritical fanatics like you, think.

    And there is a cost estimation.

    Its called a budget, derp.

  • Bones

    Derp, we have special ed kids who require one on one support.

    Oh and another reason costs go up is technology.

  • Bones

    I’ve worked in private schools.

    I dont need a link to tell me what they are like.

  • Bones

    Actually our government subsidises private schools as well.

    To the tune of $12.8 billion AUD.

    Many of them would close without it.

  • Bones

    Just on cost increases…..

    Private nonprofit four-year institution

    Tuition for 1987-1988: $15,160
    Tuition for 1997-1998: $21,020
    Tuition for 2007-2008: $27,520
    Tuition for 2017-2018: $34,740
    Public four-year institution

    Tuition for 1987-1988: $3,190
    Tuition for 1997-1998: $4,740
    Tuition for 2007-2008: $7,280
    Tuition for 2017-2018: $9,970

  • Bones

    Education costs keep increasing….

    No shit, sherlock….

    The Rising Costs of Sending Your Kids to a Private School

    https://howmuch.net/articles/average-private-school-tuition-cost

  • Ron McPherson

    “You unwelcome public workers who think my money just grows on trees. Until then, I’m waiting for the explanation.”

    Yeah, see that’s how you think. It drives your perspective. It’s the “all govt is evil” mindset and anybody who works there just wants to take my precious hard earned dollars. I’ve already told you that our budget was transparent to the public but that doesn’t matter to you. It also doesn’t matter to you that I cut my own dept by 20% in workforce because people like you think central office workers are draining you and I got tired trying to prove the worthiness of our existence. I had one of my best clerks finally quit and take a job making about a third of what she was making because she was at the office 7 freakin days a week morning, noon, and night. Her husband finally made her quit. Life was hell for some of my workers and I finally had to add back some positions so that my employees could regain some sanity. All the while we got to continuously hear from people like you about how govt was wasting your tax dollars.

  • Ron McPherson

    When I was in the public sector, of the 100 largest US K-12 school systems, ours ranked something like 98 in administrative costs (only 1 or 2 had lower costs). And yet we continuously battled politicians, elected officials and skeptical citizenry saying we were wasting tax dollars in our central administration.

    In an effort to point out our “inefficiencies”, the local taxing authority insisted on hiring a consulting firm to prove them right. It backfired. The firm said we were woefully understaffed. Several years later, the local news paper conducted their own analysis. Sure enough, the media found we were understaffed.

    And then still again, another group of consultants came in and found the same thing a few years after that. We continued to be understaffed. Taxpayer money was indeed wasted, but not by the govt workers but rather by the skeptics hiring the consultants in an attempt to prove how “evil” we were I suppose.

  • Nimblewill

    And yet it doesn’t stop kids from doing it. Do you even read my posts. I;m for gun control.

  • $144948586

    I’ve got a response, but I’d like your source. Also, are these grade schools?

    But, I do note that while private tuition has increased a little over 100%, public school has increased 233%.

  • $144948586

    Correction:
    “I’ve worked in private schools [which must only cater to upper income families because government has crowded out the market for the general middle class individual].”

  • $144948586

    “Oh and another reason costs go up is technology.”
    Technology is getting cheaper:
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/13/technology/google-education-chromebooks-schools.html

    Not to mention, the vast majority of education doesn’t need to happen on a computer.

  • $144948586

    “Dude, I doubt you even have a job to pay taxes.”
    That’s ok. I don’t need the validation of a person who must coerce me to pay his salary, because I don’t find his organization’s value worth the cost.

  • $144948586

    “It also doesn’t matter to you that I cut my own dept by 20% in workforce because people like you think central office workers are draining you”
    They request more tax payer money every year; they are draining me.
    I doesn’t matter to me that you cut your department, because what matters to me is WHY your department was 20% inflated in the first place.

    “I had one of my best clerks finally quit and take a job making about a third of what she was making because she was at the office 7 freakin days a week morning, noon, and night.”
    And few private companies ever have this problem, because there’s too much turnover which is expensive particularly to a private institution which must WIN it’s income voluntarily.

    According to Brookings, half the public school personnel are non-teaching staff.
    https://www.brookings.edu/research/half-the-people-working-in-schools-arent-classroom-teachers-so-what/
    Why does this matter, because 80% of a schools budget is salaries/benefits.
    To put this in to perspective, if teachers were a sales force (practically, they would be in a free market), you’d generally have overhead/admin be a fraction of that. And they wonder why teacher’s have a hard time getting pay increases and people are tired of suffering higher taxes.

  • Ron McPherson

    “I doesn’t matter to me that you cut your department, because what matters to me is WHY your department was 20% inflated in the first place.”

    Do you realize how utterly absurd that is? You just missed the whole point. This is another example of your pre-existing bias assuming the department was “20% inflated” rather than accepting that it was staffed correctly before the cuts in the first place, but became GROSSLY UNDERSTAFFED when I cut the positions to appease people like you. It was either that or cut classrooms which penalized the students. When I cut the department positions, the people remaining had to work exceedingly more hours. I thought that would have been clear to you. We had 8000 employees that needed to be paid each month, and in order to do that the workload could not be shared as effectively as before, and more work fell on the back of the remaining employees, all while risking a glitch in payroll because people were overworked and doing multiple jobs (because of the position eliminated in the next cubicle). What is so freakin hard to understand about this? Rest assured if given another opportunity, I would never make that mistake again, because as you’ve just shown, people who think like you will never think the cuts will be enough. Instead, it’s about me cutting 20% which to you means the department was overstaffed by 20%. Unbelievable!

    “And few private companies ever have this problem, because there’s too much turnover which is expensive particularly to a private institution which must WIN it’s income voluntarily.”

    Oh ok, “WIN it’s income.” Talk about a severe case of cognitive dissonance, or at least I hope it is that you know better. If you really explain it away like this, then that’s even worse. A private institution will cost far more to educate all students AND perform the same level of services. It can do one of two, but not both. Wanna know why? Because a private institution won’t stay in business if there is no profit margin. What are you not grasping here. If you’re for privatizing public education to for profit ventures, then services must be cut. There is no way getting around it. If you’re ok with that, then at least just be honest enough to say it. By the way Josh, how many years of experience do you have working in public sector finance?

  • $144948586

    “It was either that or cut classrooms which penalized the students.”
    Translation: “The bad tax payer who decries another tax increase should’ve just borne the brunt of the inefficiency and paid their tax increases.”

    “What is so freakin hard to understand about this?”
    What is so freakin’ hard to understand that you’d rather just demand money from people who aren’t using the services?

    “If you’re ok with that, then at least just be honest enough to say it.”
    You mean if I’m OK that kids get only the education that their parents desire for them? Absolutely!
    You mean if I’m OK that a person without kids shouldn’t have to subsidize the fecundity of another individual?
    Absolutely!

    “A private institution will cost far more to educate all students AND perform the same level of services. It can do one of two, but not both.”
    It doesn’t need to do both. It merely needs to provide only the services that the parent desires.

    “By the way Josh, how many years of experience do you have working in public sector finance?”
    I’m not a gangster, so I’ve never forced others to pay my salary at the point of a gun. Nor have I criticized others as bigots when they’ve determined I’m not worth my salary or my product isn’t worth their money.

  • Matthew

    If it doesn´t provide a sufficient return on investment, then the service is not provided. Excellent point.

  • Ron McPherson

    “The bad tax payer who decries another tax increase should’ve just borne the brunt of the inefficiency and paid their tax increases.”
    Specifically state where ‘the inefficiency’ is.

    “What is so freakin’ hard to understand that you’d rather just demand money from people who aren’t using the services?”
    Yeah we know how you feel. You’ve told us a zillion times already. Let the parents of the special needs students bear the total cost themselves. Want to know what will happen? Most wouldn’t be able to afford it on their own. So the child would not be educated, like it used to be. But hey, at least nobody will show up at your doorstep with a gun demanding you pay your taxes lol. At least it wasn’t your problem, which is the endgame here anyway right?

    “(A private institution) merely needs to provide only the services that the parent desires.”

    Yeah, again we already know how you feel. If an ESL student needs intervention, or a child victimized by systemic poverty needs to eat breakfast, or a special needs student needs one on one care, then that’s not your problem. We get it.

    “I’m not a gangster, so I’ve never forced others to pay my salary at the point of a gun.”

    I must say this one takes the prize. Comparing folks in the public sector, trying to make an honest living, and equating them with Al Capone.

  • Ron McPherson

    “Since 1970, after adjusting for inflation, real total costs K-12 have increased over $100k per student. That’s an increase of $8.5k per year per student.”

    That’s not what the graph is reflecting. You’re misinterpreting the data. It’s the total costs spent on the student during their entire school career (over a 13-year span). For instance, $165k on average had been spent on a student graduating in 2010 cumulatively throughout their school years. That comes to between $12k-$13k average per year. According to the graph, $155k would have been spent cumulatively on a student graduating in 2006. In other words, $10k total more would have been spent on a student graduating 4 years later over the course of their academic career. That equates to an increase of $769 on each grade level comparing a 4-year span, not “8.5k per year per student.”

    Edit: And when factoring in the 4 year gap (i.e. $769 more per grade level between the 2006 and 2010 student), it effectively translates into roughly less than $200 per year more each year with each successive student the following year, which is very reasonable, considering most school years are 200 days. Comes to about one dollar a day more each year.

  • $144948586

    “According to the graph, $155k would have been spent cumulatively on a student graduating in 2006. In other words, $10k total more would have been spent on a student graduating 4 years later over the course of their academic career. That equates to an increase of $769 on average per year, not “8.5k per year per student.””
    That’s because you’re looking at a 4 year span. I clearly said since 1970.

    My 2015 number is still comparing to the 1970 number.

    That being said, don’t you dare say “well inflation”, because these numbers are in terms of 2012 dollars (they’ve been adjusted for inflation).
    Thus the increase is not due to the increase in cost due to “every year the price goes up”.

    That being said after adjusting for inflation costs have still increased 1.6%.

    This means, if inflation is 2%, wages would have to increase by 3.6% on average in order for people to not be poorer in real terms.
    The average middle-class American didn’t get a 3.6% pay increase per year during the 2% inflation period however.
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/09/19/dont-hold-your-breath-bigger-raise-next-year-survey/680486001/

    This same cost increase above inflation from the 1970 data translates to over 2% per year. That means that average wage increases would have to be at least 4% in a low inflation economy such as that between 2000-now and 5-6% in a mid-inflation economy like the 90’s and some 8-9% in the 80’s.

  • Ron McPherson

    Well, if you’re going to get pissed that educating each student goes up a dollar a day each year then there’s not much else for me to say LOL!

  • Ron McPherson

    “That being said after adjusting for inflation costs have still increased 1.6%. This means, if inflation is 2%, wages would have to increase by 3.6% on average in order for people to not be poorer in real terms.“

    Were you seriously a math major? That logic only works if the taxpayer paid 1.6% of their annual total salary increase to the school lol. You’re taking school costs increases and conflating that with annual salary increases for each individual.

  • $144948586

    “If an ESL student needs intervention, or a child victimized by systemic poverty needs to eat breakfast, or a special needs student needs one on one care, then that’s not your problem.”
    Again, attack my character ignoring that government causes systemic poverty.

    “Comparing folks in the public sector, trying to make an honest living, and equating them with Al Capone.”
    So are prostitutes and many drug dealers, but we still call them for what they are: sex merchants and drug dealers. Their intentions don’t change the fact that it is extortion.

    “Specifically state where ‘the inefficiency’ is.”
    How about having a much larger funding base and still needing to increase costs faster than private schools who have to win their funds?
    You’re the one who brought up economies of scale
    https://disqus.com/home/discussion/formerlyfundie/national_school_walkout_my_child_won8217t_be_intimidated_into_silence/#comment-3815071698
    This, this is a diseconomy of scale.

  • $144948586

    Oh, so you can understand inflation?
    Then please explain why schools costs, on average increase by more than 2% per year above inflation and why that should translate to the tax payer having to pay more to the school.

    “You’re taking school costs increases and conflating that with annual salary increases for each individual.”
    No, it still works because public education tuition increases faster than wages. This means people must necessarily spend less either on housing, car, leisure or some other activity. It eats a greater percentage of their paycheck and thus robs them of the opportunities they could have had.

  • $144948586

    You can try to minimize the argument all you want, but it doesn’t change the fact that in real terms public education eats a greater percentage of a person’s paycheck each year.

  • Ron McPherson

    “Then please explain why schools costs, on average increase by more than 2% per year above inflation and why that should translate to the tax payer having to pay more to the school.”

    I have a feeling none of this will be acceptable to you, but the biggest reason is due to an increased cost attributed to personnel, increases in student enrollment resulting in increased costs in other areas, greater facility costs, and a desire to rise above staying at the status quo with education in America.

    Among the items are:
    – The need for more curriculum materials and classroom supplies due to population growth

    – Increase of teacher salaries at a higher rate than inflation in an effort to catch up with the job industry (due to teachers lagging behind inflation rates for years). Without doing this, quality people go to other jobs. Teacher salaries are still not great, and probably never will be because raising them to competitive amounts is too expensive.

    – Special education services and interventions added each year (more staff); costs can be enormous.

    – Implementation of Instructional intervention programs (people scream that test scores are low, then scream because education spending increases to address the problem; hire better people they say, then don’t want to pay the salaries to attract them)

    – Additional course offerings (electives, advanced placement courses, dual enrollment courses partnering with post-secondary institutions, etc.)

    – Additional staff to educate non-English speaking children (ESL services)

    – Hiring subject matter specialists in an effort to boost test scores in critical subject areas like math and reading (people scream that math scores are low, then scream when teacher salaries are increased in special subject areas to attract more quality; you can’t win)

    – Expansion of school lunch and breakfast programs over time (more children eating, requiring more food service workers)

    – Staff training in dealing with disabled students and instructional practices

    – Implementation of dropout prevention programs (because public funding is often tied to enrollment and attendance)

    – Alternative and vocational instruction programs (to help students who may not be inclined toward post-secondary college); vocational instructors often work with local companies to prepare students to be employable after high school

    – Hiring of additional non-instructional staff like school counselors, psychologists, physical therapists, etc. in an effort to provide very real help to kids

    – Supplementary services such as vision, hearing, speech to help children overcome disadvantages

    – Students staying in school longer over time means increased costs

    – Growth of the kindergarten program over time, and continuing (from implementation of the program, growing then from half day to full day; part-time become full-time)

    – Longer school years in an effort to cram as much instructional time in as possible (got to turn the lights on and turn on the air conditioner)

    – Reduction in average classroom sizes requiring more teachers (in an effort to improve the learning environment)

    – Higher academic standards demanded by the public requiring the hiring of educational assistants such that teachers can place more of their focus on teaching

    – New classroom construction to accommodate higher enrollment each year (results in higher overlapping debt costs); typically districts must borrow the money to build a school thru bond indebtedness; this would be manageable if you only had to build a building or did a major upgrade every 20 years (but it’s not feasible because you have to have a place for the kid to sit in a classroom; we don’t teach them under an old oak tree anymore); when the need arises you have to address it. You can’t say well go stand outside or in the hall kid until we pay off our debt in 20 years. Major facility needs typically outpace the rate you can pay debt off.

    – Additional bus services each year due to higher enrolment

    – More intensive accountability measures in place regarding accounting, budgeting, and HR compliance (central administration)

    – More IT technicians needed each year because of more learning devices in schools

    – Rising insurance costs above inflation rates

    I’m stopping now because I’m tired of typing. By the way, this wasn’t all implemented in 1971 and nothing else happened after that. It has been a process over time. Schools add the programs in the year they can make the budget work. That’s why you see costs above merely inflation. Staying even with inflation presumes all other factors stay the same (same number of students, same number of teachers, same number of programs, same number of buses, etc.)

  • Ron McPherson

    private schools do not provide the same degree of services as public schools. It’s apples to oranges.

  • Ron McPherson

    It’s funny Josh how you always talk about your character being attacked when you claim my department was overstaffed and equate my employees to Al Capone lol. Like, you never spent 1 second in my department understanding anything about why the employees were needed, nor did you spend one second with any of the people you equate to criminals. I remain amazed.

  • $144948586

    “increases in student enrollment resulting in increased costs in other areas”
    Just fyi, this is called diseconomy of scale. If the result of more kids => higher per student cost, then we recognize we’re not reaching economies of scale and are, in fact, moving AWAY from minimal cost. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7596de80b92f5d37e4f7a06668a1276e44a6742120c5dc1baf4a9b7b792148e0.png

    Therefore, the problem will just get worse and the taxing will get heavier. This is the definition of unsustainable, Ron.
    This is a problem that private organizations MUST solve, because their livelihood depends on it.
    The economics are the same for public and private entities, but when the public system fails it works on forcing the private system to fail as well by taxing it ever so heavily.

  • $144948586

    “equate my employees to Al Capone”
    Extortion is extortion; it matters not a person’s intention or when Al Capone’s name is “Government”.

  • $144948586
  • Ron McPherson

    Yeah, I think I’m done with this

  • $144948586

    That’s fine; I hope my diseconomies of scale diagram was helpful!

    I’ll be happy to no longer call it extortion if you can tell me how it isn’t.

  • Ron McPherson

    I understand the concept of economies/diseconomies of scale. Research the complexities of the education industry and you’ll understand why that’s not so easy. The problem here is that kids don’t come in nice, neat little packages of scalability , in pre-determined grade levels, in pre-determined school zones, in pre-determined demographics, in pre-determined educational levels. Human bodies don’t work like widgets. If K-5 school A has 180 students with 6 teachers (maxed out at 30 students per grade level), and 10 additional first graders show up (6% increase in student population) requiring an additional position to be hired so as to not violate overcrowding (there is a reason for those regulations), you don’t get to hire 6% of a teacher in order to maintain economies of scale. If school bus overcrowding becomes an issue due to a new subdivision, you need another bus for safety purposes if the zoned bus is already full. You can’t call another bus with capacity going to another school across town to swing by and pick those kids up, unless you want those kids to show up an hour late to school each day. If a special needs kid enrolls at your school, you don’t get to just use the third grade teacher who has a couple seats in her classroom, namely because she isn’t trained or certified SPED, plus the IEP of the SPED kid requires special services apart from regular ed classroom inclusion. I thought that would have been apparent by now based on all the other factors I’ve mentioned. Should school systems look for economies of scale. Absolutely, and we did that regularly, primarily because we had to. We had no other option. Contrary to what you think, not all government services exist just so they can bleed you dry, nor do they assume that increasing the tax base will fix everything.

    The easiest way to realize economies of scale is to close small schools and rezone to larger schools. But when the population growth exceeds building capacity, you’re only option is to install portable classrooms which we did, add major renovations to existing buildings which we did, or build bigger schools. I lived this stuff for umpteen years. I spent much energy on trying to figure out economies of scale. This is not a new concept Josh, and public sector finance departments are not unaware of this. So you pick your poison. Sure, we can save operating costs through economies of scale by closing schools. But you then incur capital/debt related costs through increasing capacities to the schools you’ve rezoned the students too. You’re taking an overly simplistic view of this. And I understand. It’s never been a part of your life in trying to figure it out. I have. But I realize you think I’m akin to John Dillinger for stealing the public’s money.

  • seashell

    The right to freedom of religious expression comes from the government in the first place. How does that fit in with your claim that the government is always wrong and do you think the private sector could do it better?

  • $144948586

    “The easiest way to realize economies of scale is to close small schools and rezone to larger schools. ”
    This suggests that it’s small schools which fail to have economies of scale, but cost per student is clearly higher in more densely populated zones and schools.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2015/06/02/the-states-that-spend-the-most-and-the-least-on-education-in-one-map/?utm_term=.dd0928168258
    Thus the easiest way to realize economies of scale appears to be the opposite of what you’ve said.

    “I understand the concept of economies/diseconomies of scale. Research the complexities of the education industry and you’ll understand why that’s not so easy. The problem here is that kids don’t come in nice, neat little packages of scalability , in pre-determined grade levels, in pre-determined school zones, in pre-determined demographics, in pre-determined .”
    If you doubt that the private sector could not do this because “kids are just too varied”, then why on earth do you think the government could?
    The fact is that the private sector HAS done this.
    You have previously claimed that the government provides roads, but it’s not true. Private companies provide roads, they just get funded by the money government takes.
    You have previously claimed that the government explores space, but it’s not true. Private companies provide rockets, they just get funded by the money government takes.
    You have previously claimed that the government provides military, but it’s not true. Private companies provide ships, missiles, planes, bombs, etc, they just get funded by the money government takes.
    You have previously claimed that the government provides education, but it’s not true. Private individuals provide education, they just get funded by the money government takes.

    Don’t you see? Everything is done at the private level, and schools ARE past their economies of scale and are moving away from minimum LRAC. This means that eventually they will fail; they have to, not because they should but because that is the economic state of the matter.

    Their only option, and the only one they truly seek, is to shift the burden to the taxpayer. They push for new home appraisals, higher tax portions, etc. All these things chip away at the purchasing power of individuals and ultimately makes them poorer.

    No, school are not the only government program guilty of this, BUT it is to the detriment of children unprepared for the future industry of jobs and to the detriment of working class people who’d rather their kids go elsewhere.

    *All this aside, the basis of taxation is violence.*

  • Ron McPherson

    Ok Josh

  • $144948586

    “The right to freedom of religious expression comes from the government in the first place.”
    So you’d say the Jews didn’t have the right to religious expression in Germany?

  • $144948586
  • Ron McPherson

    You’ve equated densely populated zones to large school facilities. Not the same thing.

  • $144948586

    Perhaps not, but there appears to be a correlation. That being said, it doesn’t change where we are on the graph.

  • seashell

    I do not know the contents of the pre-Holocaust German constitution. I do know that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” can be found within the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution’s Bill of Rights. So again, how does your claim that the government is always wrong square with the knowledge that freedom of religious expression comes from the government in the first place?

  • $144948586

    I do not know the contents of the pre-Holocaust German constitution.”
    It doesn’t matter; if you were Jewish, you got killed. Was this OK or was the government wrong to murder people for their religion?

    Was it wrong for ISIS in the Islamic State to murder Yazidis for their religion, given that in that region they established their de facto government?

    I mean if government is the one who grants freedom of religion, then you have to grant that it is not wrong of them to forbid it or prescribe the death penalty, right?

  • Al Cruise

    Yes and special needs students need people who care about the vulnerable in society in a meaningful way. Private schools [including most Christian ones] view them as an unnecessary burden. Want to find true Christianity in action , observe a special needs attendant in a public school.

  • seashell

    It’s too bad the public education finance sector lost you, Ron. The portion of the public that demands high quality public services and education from the government for very little money would not think of demanding the same from the private sector. To push out the good ones like you with demands to make $5.00 stretch into $500.00 while overworking compounds the problems. I’m not sure that even half of the population is so dense (although the ones who are can be loud), but since the 2016 election, I’m not sure about anyone in America anymore.

    Good job explaining the financial complexities of public education. I learned a few things. Thanks.

  • Ron McPherson

    Thanks so much. Really appreciate your kind words

  • Ron McPherson

    Beautifully stated!

  • seashell

    Let me put it this way: without the government, property rights and freedom of religious expression would be meaningless, although perhaps a tad better for white people than people of color. Why labor if there isn’t some guarantee that it will be paid for, why own property if somebody with a bigger gun can come along and claim it, and why pray to a God if a majority thinks it’s the wrong God and punishes the act? It’s disingenuous (to say the least) to compare ISIS and Hitler’s Germany with Western governments to make a dubious point, and if that’s all you’ve got … you’re on your own and probably lonely.

  • $144948586

    I’m merely asking if you truly believe that government is the one who grants the right to freedom of religious expression. If you do, then you’ve merely got to say “the Jews got what they deserved, given that they disobeyed the law being Jewish and all.”
    So does government grant the right to freedom of religion, or does it merely, in our government, honor the right to religion one inherently has?

  • Matthew

    How would special needs children be adequately taught and cared for in your libertarian, free market, no taxation world, Josh?

  • $144948586

    Matthew, I’m not an entrepreneur so I don’t know the best way. But, good people do exist, you know. That is, contrary to what Ron has stated earlier, companies are not just “out to make a profit” while government is “out to provide a service”. The primary difference between corporations and government is that corporations are “out to make a profit BY PROVIDING a service” while government’s are “out to provide a service REGARDLESS OF if it’s profitable”. The distinction is important, because despite the special needs kids (who are not the driver of exorbitant schooling increases) having a higher cost per student, they are not the reason “only public schools could provide service”. It’s important to be profitable even in the public finance sense, because profits mean that what you are doing is sustainable. Without profit, a firm which relies on winning its customer’s money must go out of business and new firms will provide the service for a price the consumer is willing to pay.

    This is long but important
    However because of the above distinction between corporation and government, if a government’s project is not “profitable”, then that means that the tuition costs aren’t high enough. So they increase them beyond inflation to become profitable. But we’ve only ever seen, in the chart about, that the last 50 years has brought ever-increasing costs to school (above inflation). At best, special education only account for 15-20% of the increase–you can see this in the discussion with Ron above.
    Now, they’ve raise tuition costs, but, again, schools always remain underfunded and costs always exceed the amount tax payers pay. So again, they must pass on the increased cost to tax payers. Eventually, they must take in more tax from the taxpayer and it always increases the burden to the tax payer. The difference? Well, high taxes make people leave; look at Seattle. Look at California. For this reason, it is unsustainable and if a private business engaged in the tactic of raising costs 2% above inflation every year, they’d have been replaced.

    The point: both systems, if they remain unprofitable, are unsustainable. Yet government, unlike a private company, will keep going. The result: the tax base will have left the city to where the companies have gone, and the kids remaining will receive terribly poor educations while teachers fight to get higher salaries. When a company fails, it sucks. When a government fails, it sucks much worse.
    end of long point

    You see, profit is not a bad thing. Profit simply means, for a firm which can’t force people to buy their products, people are willing to pay a premium for their services. It’s actually a signal that the entrepreneur is doing what the customer wants at a price the customer agrees with.

    You may say, “Well what about monopolies or extremely high priced services that should be cheaper?”
    You name them and we can discuss how the government is involved.

    So how would a free market care for the education needs of special education kids?
    If people want to purchase those services for their child, a market will find a way to do it (provided the government doesn’t forbid working for the prices people are wanting to pay–which is all that minimum wage does: unemploys people willing to accept pay at that rate and fails to allow consumers to buy those goods which can only be provided at those rates).

  • Ron McPherson

    “How would special needs children be adequately taught and cared for in your libertarian, free market, no taxation world…”

    Hi Matthew, I hope you won’t mind if I weigh in a bit on this. The challenges for parents of special needs children would likely be far more daunting without government intervention. For one thing, the education of special needs children went largely unaddressed for the first 200 years of our country’s existence. It wasn’t until the federal government stepped in in the early 1970s that assistance from public education was provided.

    Prior to government intervention, most special needs children received no education at all unless they were home schooled (there were a few ‘special schools’, though not many). Private schools were not clamoring to educate these kids for obvious reasons. Privatizing special education would cost a fortune for parents with special education children. Couple that with the fact that many parents of special needs children already earn less than those with regular ed children, then one can see how bleak the prospects would be for them. On top of that is the fact that kids with disabilities naturally cost families more than kids with no disabilities.

    For instance, studies have shown that mothers of children with autism earn far less than mothers of children who aren’t autistic. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand why; more time is required for the parent to be at home (which translates to less time for a career/less time at work).

    So ultimately what we would have without government intervention would be that special education kids would simply not be educated, just like pre-1970s. We have 200 years worth of history to prove it. For-profit schools would know that costs would be very high for special education (far higher than regular education students), which would require much higher tuition rates (I can’t imagine anyone disputing that). Far more staff needed for the special education population (you can’t bundle up groups of 30 special needs kids into a single classroom like regular ed students to realize economies of scale), more nurses would be needed, therapists, equipment etc. In other words, for-profit schools have no reason to spring up on every block to take care of the special needs kids.

    One could try and make the case that a for-profit school could blend the SPED population into regular instruction setting (public schools try and do that as much as possible). But here’s the problem, parents paying tuition at a private school could find lower tuition costs at a private school that does not cater to SPED students at all. So the obvious reality is that private schools catering to SPED students would lose regular education parents. Either they go out of business, or they no longer cater to SPED students. That’s why capitalism won’t work in this segment.

    So ultimately, here’s the scenario:
    – Families of special needs children face greater financial burden than families without

    – Families of special needs kids often earn less (which further adds to the burden; i.e. personal income is lower while family expenses are higher)

    – Cost of special education, even in a not-for-profit setting (i.e. K-12 public school), would typically be too expensive for parents of special needs children if they were required to bear the financial burden themselves (costs can be diluted through the taxation of the entire citizenry; i.e. everybody chips in)

    – Cost of special education in a for-profit setting would be even more expensive due to profit margin

    With all of these factors, it’s easy to see why the government stepped in after 200 years. The government is the one who came to the rescue here whether Josh likes it or not. Is public education for special needs kids perfect? No. Is it far and away better now than it was for special needs kids? Obviously yes, because needs were not getting addressed until the government intervened.

  • Matthew

    What if the rate the market charges for special education and special needs is unaffordable for most families? How many “good” people are out there Josh?

    Thanks so much for taking the time to compose such a long and comprehensive response.

  • Matthew

    Thanks Ron.

    I would agree with seashell. I think the school district you worked for lost a talented person :-)

    I want to add, though, I´m beginning to follow Josh´s argument(s), but like I mentioned in the cable TV and U.S. mail example some time ago, I just see people being left behind if the market is the only solution for attempting to meet people´s needs.

  • Ron McPherson

    thanks much!

  • $144948586

    “Thanks so much for taking the time to compose such a long and comprehensive response.”
    Of course!

    “How many “good” people are out there Josh?”
    We tend to believe that public schools are full of them, so I’m OK with that answer.

    “What if the rate the market charges for special education and special needs is unaffordable for most families?”
    Why would the market rate change?

  • seashell

    So does government grant the right to freedom of religion, or does it merely, in our government, honor the right to religion one inherently has?

    So even if we say that government ‘merely’ honors the right, how does that square with your claim that government is always wrong? And the second part of this was if you think the private sector can better honor that right? Because I will argue that the private sector will not honor that right, and will go so far as to ignore its existence.

  • $144948586

    You pose the question:

    “How does that fit in with your claim that the
    government is always wrong and do you think the private sector could do
    it better?”

    From the premise:
    “The right to freedom of religious expression comes from the government
    in the first place.

    But no, freedom of religious expression is honored by government BECAUSE it’s recognized as a right one inherently has DESPITE government’s stance on it. It’s from this basic principle that you can say what Hitler did was wrong. If government defines rights, then you can’t judge a law to be wrong.

    That being said, I’ve note made the claim that government is always wrong. I’ve said it’s the most inefficient at what it does, and it’s inherently built on violence–to this end, it is always wrong: it “provides” by compromising the inherent rights of a person to their property–right that legitimately exist outside of government.

    That being said, yes I do think private markets honor that right. In what situation will “the private sector not honor that right, and will go so far as to ignore its existence.”
    What right do you want to discuss in this instance?

  • seashell

    We can stay with the 1st Amendment – freedom of religious expression and throw in freedom of speech. Are you familiar with Homeowner’s Associations (HOAs)? 80% of new construction involves an HOA and about 70 million people (1 in 5) live under their rule. The Association itself is usually formed as a non-profit and requires mandatory membership of the owners. Nowhere in the covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CCRs) that owners receive when closing is it stated that they are signing away their constitutional rights, but they are. The HOA board of directors can and do restrict an owner from displaying Christmas lights, the manger scene, Mezuzahs on a doorpost and anything else they want to abolish. The right to freedom of religious expression does not exist in an HOA. Nor does freedom of speech and due process.

    The unregulated industry (which is about $90 billion a year in real estate and worth $5 trillion in assets) claims owners voluntarily move into HOAs or Condo Associations and fights all attempts at regulation. However, in the Southeast there isn’t much choice and for people who want to live within 50 miles of their workplace, an HOA is often the only choice. It’s privatization at its worst and is the most pervasive, leaving most owners unhappy and stressed.

    Coalition for Community Housing Policy in the Public Interest: https://www.chppi.org
    Survey results from CHPPI: https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/1db237_c967f15803b742abb3b1300ae450f364.pdf
    Kansas City Reporter series on HOAs: HOAs from hell: Homes associations torment residents they’re supposed to support: http://www.kansascity.com/news/special-reports/hoa/article92502962.html

  • Bones

    Well yeah it did in those communities it was banned.

    “I;m for gun control.”

    Yeah thats why you’re attempting some stupid equivalence between school shootings and sniffing petrol.

  • Bones

    Lol it was an Independent Christian School in a regional town.

    Not real upmarket.

    It also couldnt cater for certain subjects eg chemistry.

    You had to go to a public school to do that.

    Btw the government here spends billions of dollars on private schools too to stop them going arse up.

  • Bones

    Lol, you know nothing about schools eg technology has to replaced every 3-5 years.
    My school is in the process of having every student with an ipad from prep-6.

    Thats over 400 of them .

    And yes we educate students to be technologically literate.

    Like how to pick when people write bs on blogs they hate.

  • Bones

    Lol…i’ll take that as a no.
    So you’re just sponging off your wife and parents and probably the government.

  • $144948586

    “Lol…i’ll take that as a no.”
    What you take it as matters not to me; for your conscience’s sake, I take no benefit from government and don’t mooch off my wife.

  • $144948586

    “Lol, you know nothing about schools eg technology has to replaced every 3-5 years.”
    Because no other industry uses technology…

    “My school is in the process of having every student with an ipad from prep-6.”
    And I bet you didn’t have to receive parental approval.

    “And yes we educate students to be technologically literate.”
    No no, kids are technologically literate despite school, because tech products are cheaper than ever; only for a small number of very impoverished kids do you teach them to be technologically literate.

  • $144948586

    “Not real upmarket.”
    Also not in a free market crowded out by government competition which takes their keep of a person’s taxes first and then, beyond that, private tuition is paid for out of the left over.

    “Btw the government here spends billions of dollars on private schools too to stop them going arse up.”
    Then they’re not private. Other examples of not private “private” institutions include Bear Sterns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, JP Morgan Chase, and the public universities whose tuition rates have consistently inflated approximately 2% above inflation each year since 1990.
    http://www.finaid.org/savings/images/tuition_inflation.gif

  • $144948586

    “Are you familiar with Homeowner’s Associations (HOAs)?”
    Yup, lived under a great one that had low-average fees but provided several parks including a nice community pool park and several small water playgrounds.
    Left the area though, because the local government kept appraising our homes at ever increasing values.

    “Nowhere in the covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CCRs) that
    owners receive when closing is it stated that they are signing away
    their constitutional rights, but they are.”
    First, what rights?
    Second, the implication this is making is nonsense. You know that you are buying a home with HOA; that is disclosed to you before you decide to make an offer. The catch though, unlike government, is that the HOA cannot decide what rights you do and don’t have beyond the original agreement.

    “The right to freedom of religious expression does not exist in an HOA.”
    You voluntarily agreed to these terms when you first determined to move in to the neighborhood they insured would stay nice enough to attract you.

    “However, in the Southeast there isn’t much choice and for people who
    want to live within 50 miles of their workplace, an HOA is often the
    only choice. It’s privatization at its worst and is the most pervasive, leaving most owners unhappy and stressed.”
    No, it’s a developer entrusting that his land which he owned first remained at an acceptable level. You might not like it, but your right isn’t being oppressed or disrespected, because you weren’t the owner of the property first, and you contractually agree to the terms of which you buy it. In this regard, you have voluntarily given up certain rights to live there.

    No one took the their land from them; with HOA’s, unlike government, you agreed to be there.

  • seashell

    Again, when you live in an HOA, you lose your constitutional rights, including freedom of religious expression. So you’re pissed off that the gov’t wants to curtail the baker’s right in order to protect other peoples right not to be discriminated against, but you’re all for an HOA to completely abolish that right? Why hasn’t the baker “voluntarily” given up certain rights in order to sell to the public? And once again, in many places ‘voluntary’ applies to living in an HOA like “voluntary” applies to living with this government.

  • $144948586

    “Again, when you live in an HOA, you lose your constitutional rights, including freedom of religious expression.”
    You buy a home and enter an HOA voluntarily, seashell. It’s in the contract that you sacrifice certain rights to live there.

    The same is not true of government.

    “Why hasn’t the baker “voluntarily” given up certain rights in order to sell to the public?”
    Because there is no contract which can be furnished in which we find government was voluntarily given domain over the land it claims.

    “And once again, in many places ‘voluntary’ applies to living in an HOA like ‘voluntary’ applies to living with this government.”
    This doesn’t matter, because the voluntary owner of the property has the original right to determine under what conditions their land can be purchased.

    Amazon is quickly becoming the sole seller in many industries, but you’re still not forced to buy from them. The only reason you do is because 99% of people believe they are the better alternative to those whom they compete with. The same principle applies with sellers of property: residents and businesses deem their property better buys than the alternative. This has the natural consequence that these living conditions spread. Again, you’re not being forced to live under their domain though. Admittedly, you can’t enjoy the benefits of living in their regions, but that’s not their problem. The collective of customers have dictated what is most desirable without forcing you to follow suit; once again the same can’t be said for government.

  • seashell

    Because there is no contract which can be furnished in which we find government was voluntarily given domain over the land it claims.

    In that case, who did this “voluntary owner” with his original rights purchase or claim the land from? The collective of customers are unhappy with developer restrictions but bump up against the quagmire of of corporate law, property law, contract law and real estate law and the industries that profit from them, that allows HOA Boards to control what kinds of blinds are put on the windows of the houses the owners purportedly own. For somebody so concerned with his own property rights, you act casually about other’s.

    “The law in this area is an unspeakable quagmire. [Regarding the law on covenants] The intrepid soul who ventures into this formidable wilderness never emerges unscarred. Some, the smarter ones, quickly turn back to take up something easier like the income taxation of trusts and estates. Others, having lost their way, plunge on and after weeks of effort emerge not far from where they began, clearly the worse for wear. On looking back they see the trail they thought they broke obscured with foul smelling waters and noxious weeds. Few willingly take up the challenge again.”

    (Rabin, Fundamentals of Modern Real Property Law (1974) p. 489.)

  • Bones

    Durr they’re private schools derpadderp.

    They are not run by the government.

    You dont own definitions.

    And as has been clearly pointed out privare school rates are soaring as well.

  • Bones

    Because schools have to continually replace technology..

    Ffs you dont think poor people exist do you?

    And we’re educating people for the 21st century.

    That includes educating them about morons advancing spurious arguments on the internet.

  • Bones

    Yep…..sure too busy sponging off others.

  • Ron McPherson

    “Then they’re not private.”

    Public schools in the U.S. are required to pass an allocated portion of federal funds (eg Title I) to private schools with students who qualify.

  • Matthew

    I´m not certain I understand the question Josh.

  • Nimblewill

    Nah! Just to point out your hypocrisy.

  • $144948586

    Then they’re not private, Ron. Unless, of course, the tuition is coming from the parents and the tax deduction the parent can take from paying for public school. In that case, it’s the parent’s money. Otherwise, if the money is coming from others then it’s not private. Plain and simple.

  • $144948586

    “Because schools have to continually replace technology..”
    3-5 years is not continuously. That being said, every other industry must do the same.

    “And we’re educating people for the 21st century.”
    No, generally kids are learning the same things taught for the past 1000 years: calculus, reading/comprehension, etc.
    That being said, most kids must leave high school for university because the kids aren’t adequately prepared for the jobs of the future–so the ones who don’t go eventually move in to jobs that will be automated out when the same government who screwed them over k-12 end up raising their minimum wage so computers take those jobs.
    The fortunate one is hewho finds and apprenticeship in blue collar work that isn’t easily automated…too bad that most of these depend on construction projects and yet your government is busy destroying economic growth.
    https://www.google.com/search?q=australia+gdp+growth&oq=australia+gdp+&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j0j69i57j69i60l3.2927j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

  • $144948586

    “Durr they’re private schools derpadderp.”
    Yet accept extorted public funds? Hmm. I guess you work for a “private” school then.

    “And as has been clearly pointed out privare school rates are soaring as well.”
    At less than half the rate as public schools.

  • $144948586

    “In that case, who did this “voluntary owner” with his original rights purchase or claim the land from? ”
    I’m sure he can get you the deed. No one is disputing his claim, though.

    “The collective of customers are unhappy with developer restrictions”
    That’s just not true; the collective of customers might get annoyed every once in a while, but it’s this same nuisance that attracted people to those neighborhoods in the first place. They also keep home values up, which then (as crime is inexplicably linked to income) keeps out crime, and encourages businesses to move in these neighborhoods and thus hire from these neighborhoods.

    That being said, it was the developers property (and large parts still are) so they have the right to sell under whichever conditions they desire. As they did not force you to live there, it’s not an infringement of your rights.

    “quagmire of of corporate law, property law, contract law and real estate law and the industries that profit from them”
    Notice that you’ve said “law” four times before you said “industry”. Who controls law? Government–not saying it has to be this way, but that’s the way it is. Welcome to believing the government is wrong.

    “that allows HOA Boards to control what kinds of blinds are put on the windows of the houses the owners purportedly own. For somebody so concerned with his own property rights, you act casually about other’s.”
    Can I be more clear? The were sold the property on voluntary agreement that they must maintain it in agreement with the HOA, with whom they will be forced to submit to. Again, on voluntary agreement.

  • $144948586

    You’re requested to know “What if the rate the market charges for special education and special needs is unaffordable for most families?”

    But rates do not change for “no reason”, the reasons behind these changes matter because it informs the entrepreneur in how he/she should react.

    Reasoning through the issue isn’t a logic problem that is to be figured out in some eternal form in time and space; change occurs and what once worked as solution can no longer work. Thus, we have to know what drove the change.

    Thus, it’s important to know why the market would increase the price for special education.

  • Ron McPherson

    “Then they’re not private…Otherwise, if the money is coming from others then it’s not private. Plain and simple.”

    And you would be wrong. You don’t get to just make up your own definition of what makes a school private. By the way, if you think a school receiving a share of government dollars or services defaults to the definition of a public school, then you need to scrap every piece of data comparing private to public that you’ve shared and start all over. Private school data does not include only those schools that meet Josh’s definition.

    Federal law allows private schools to receive a component of federal funding or services for eligible students, specifically under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

  • $144948586

    “You don’t get to just make up your own definition of what makes a school private.”
    I’m not making up definitions; if their money is coerced from the civil society, it’s simply not a private institution.

    “By the way, if you think a school receiving a share of government dollars or services defaults to the definition of a public school, then you need to scrap every piece of data comparing private to public that you’ve shared and start all over.”
    No you don’t; the U.S. has a government which allows freer markets than most of the world; that doesn’t mean I should scrap the evidence for benefits of free markets due to the simple fact government exists.

    There is a correlation that can be drawn: the freer the market the better the outcome.
    Same is true of schools, and we can also consider their higher-than-inflation growth as merely inefficiencies possibly cause by the same phenomena of receiving extorted funds.

    “Federal law allows private schools to receive a component of federal funding or services for eligible students, specifically under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Elementary and Secondary Education Act.”
    If I’m not mistaken, the funds are this: parents are given a tax deduction for the tuition that they’ve paid. That’s not the same as receiving coerced funds from not-the-parent.
    In the case that they do receive these funds, I fail to see how that is not public.

    Just because one calls itself private doesn’t make it so; and if we’re to judge by their actions, well they force taxpayers to give them money: definitely not private.

  • Ron McPherson

    “I’m not making up definitions; if their money is coerced from the civil society, it’s simply not a private institution.”

    Yeah, you’re making up definitions. When you go online to look for private school data what do you google? “Private Schools”? If so, that would include private schools that may receive federal funding/services for eligible students. So yeah, since by your definition those schools are not really private, you need to scrap your data and start over. Either that, or you need to change your definition. You can’t have it both ways.

    “If I’m not mistaken, the funds are this: parents are given a tax deduction for the tuition that they’ve paid. That’s not the same as receiving coerced funds from not-the-parent.”

    You ARE mistaken. Lord have mercy, you would argue with a fence post. The funds are typically in the form of support services administered to eligible children in private schools often administered by the public school system in which the private school resides.

  • $144948586
  • $144948586

    “Yeah, you’re making up definitions. When you go online to look for private school data what do you google? “Private Schools”?”
    http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+is+a+private+school
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ba60d9461fb14daa0256d4047cd79ebbc220f917c23cd1c928357f8141b58cb2.jpg

  • Ron McPherson

    sigh…

    Google
    “do private schools receive government funding”

    you’re cracking me up

  • $144948586

    “do private schools receive government funding”
    Then it’s not private, by definition.
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ba60d9461fb14daa0256d4047cd79ebbc220f917c23cd1c928357f8141b58cb2.jpg

  • Ron McPherson

    LOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • seashell

    They also keep home values up…

    Do you have any proof of this? No, you don’t. There isn’t any.

    …keeps out crime, and encourages businesses to move in these neighborhoods and thus hire from these neighborhoods.

    Most of them spend their time and money keeping businesses out.

    And if the homeowner isn’t actually battling it out with their HOA, they are still on the hook for the neighbors that the association takes on. See: Quarter-million dollar screen-door battle shows need for HOA limits.

    The were sold the property on voluntary agreement that they must maintain it in agreement with the HOA, with whom they will be forced to submit to. Again, on voluntary agreement.

    As the New Jersey Supreme Court explained in a free speech HOA case (NJ includes free speech in its constitution), MAZDABROOK COMMONS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION v. KHAN:

    Can fundamental constitutional rights be properly waived by including waiver language in the midst of a more than fifty-page, single-spaced document?…it is unclear that the approach in this case can result in a knowing and intelligent waiver of fundamental constitutional rights.

    What you call a voluntary agreement, also known as an adhesion contract is questionable when (a) there are few other places to live in the area (lack of alternatives) and (b) even lawyers have trouble decoding the CCRs, never mind the homeowners who would simply like to have where to place the couch on their minds. I’ve left out the hundreds of fraud cases that have exist in HOAs and the problems that they cause everyone, the private and public sectors alike, when they run out of money. Even the most absolute of libertarians have admitted that trouble exists in “Privatopia” (Evan McKenzie) and they are not the paradises that libertarians imagined.

    IOW, you may hate government, but privatization can be much worse. Ask the UK.

  • $144948586

    “What you call a voluntary agreement, also known as an adhesion contract is questionable when (a) there are few other places to live in the area (lack of alternatives) and (b) even lawyers have trouble decoding the CCRs”
    a) If I own a farm, it is not my problem that you can’t build a house on it. Similarly, if I own a lot and decide to build houses on it, then I reserve the right to determine what can and cannot happen on the lot if it’s in the selling contract. That’s not “unconstitutional”.
    b) Yes, lawyer’s have trouble taking away the property rights of the original owner who sold the house they built ON VOLUNTARY CONDITION that certain rights are withheld from the buyer.

    “I’ve left out the hundreds of fraud cases that have exist in HOAs and the problems that they cause everyone”
    If it’s such a problem, people wouldn’t move there.

    “Most of them spend their time and money keeping businesses out.”
    Well, planting a business in a residency, sure. But keeping them in the general city, they attract them.

    “They also keep home values up…
    Do you have any proof of this? No, you don’t. There isn’t any.”
    I’ll try to research it later; that being said, it doesn’t matter as it’s still a voluntary agreement to live in that community. If the developer wants one there, we don’t have a right to say no as it’s not our home until we agree, voluntarily, to it.

  • $144948586
  • Ron McPherson

    I dare you to google “do private schools receive government funding” and post the pic

  • $144948586

    I’m telling you that it isn’t private, by definition.
    I need not hear someone else tell me “private receives government funds”, because, by definition:
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ba60d9461fb14daa0256d4047cd79ebbc220f917c23cd1c928357f8141b58cb2.jpg
    It’s not private.

  • Ron McPherson

    Uh huh. It seems you’re confused about the word ‘support’. Google that too and see what you get. It says “to bear all or PART of the weight” LOLOL

  • Ron McPherson

    Dude. The word support does NOT mean completely 100% entirely in every instance. Google the word support and see what you get. It says to bear all or PART of the weight. Anybody should know that. Good grief. You get points for stubbornness at least

  • $144948586

    You do realize it sounds pathetic to begin parsing words, yes?
    It can’t be partly supported and rather, Ron. It’s either “partly supported by and”, OR it’s “[wholly] supported by rather”.

  • $144948586

    “The word support does NOT mean completely 100% entirely in every instance.”
    It doesn’t have to be; the word “rather” is the most limiting, Dude. By context it implies “in contrast to”

  • Ron McPherson

    The word ‘rather’ does not dictate the definition of ‘support.’ Let me try and make this easier for you.
    “A private school is supported by (most or all of it’s weight is borne by) a private organization or private individuals, rather than by the government.” To underscore the point, a public school is supported by (most of it’s weight is borne by) the citizenry through public dollars secured by taxpayers, rather than by user fees. I can’t believe I’m literally having to spell this out for you. You superficially interpreted a google response to the exclusion of a zillion other google responses which would correct your misinterpretation.

  • Ron McPherson

    um, you’re kidding right?

  • Ron McPherson

    Suppose I make $100,000 year. Suppose that $95,000 comes from my primary job as CFO of a private school network. Suppose the other $5,000 comes from consulting I do for a public school system. So I say, “My family is supported through my job as a CFO rather than through consulting services.” So according to you, because of your misunderstanding of the words “support” and “rather,” I really don’t receive any income from consulting services. Like, what the crap?

  • $144948586

    “So according to you, because of your misunderstanding of the words “support” and “rather,” I really don’t receive any income from consulting services.”

    It’d be an odd pattern of speech; it’s much more appropriate to say “by both my job as a CFO and through consulting services.
    If you kept pressing the point, I’d suggest you’re purposefully deceitful.

  • $144948586
  • $144948586

    I can be annoying too, Ron:
    “A private school is supported by (most or all of it’s weight is borne by) a private organization or private individuals, rather than by the government.”

    But I’m tired of bickering; at the end of the day, your definition of private schools still leads to schools that are more efficient and less inflationary (per Bones).
    https://disqus.com/home/discussion/formerlyfundie/national_school_walkout_my_child_won8217t_be_intimidated_into_silence/#comment-3817055967

    In regards to using your definitions in regular speech, please see my comment:
    https://disqus.com/home/discussion/formerlyfundie/national_school_walkout_my_child_won8217t_be_intimidated_into_silence/#comment-3821050873

  • Ron McPherson

    Sure Josh

  • Ron McPherson

    Ok Josh

  • $144948586
  • $144948586
  • Ron McPherson

    Uh huh

  • Bones

    The hypocrisy of banning petrol in communities in petrol sniffing communities…..

    Yeah I think you proved you’re a bit of an arse.

  • Bones

    Someone’s doubling down on being stupid.

  • Bones

    Is that the 6th time you’ve posted that?

    It shows you’re a moron.

  • Bones

    Special kids are an inefficient waste of money….

    They should be working in cotton mills and mines……

  • Bones

    From my experience, they won’t…..

  • Bones

    Government does what the private sector won’t and can’t.

  • Bones

    Private schools contribution to special education for over 100 years = 0

  • Bones

    Private schools = good people.

    People in government = Nazis…..

  • Matthew

    Supply and demand?

  • Ron McPherson

    Yeah, capitalism will come to the rescue

  • Ron McPherson

    Josh also thinks the people in my department who worked 80 hours a week sacrificing their own lives and that of their families (to ensure that the folks teaching our kids could receive their paychecks) were mobsters akin to Al Capone

  • Matthew

    I love when you say “Like, what the crap?” :-)

  • Ron McPherson

    Heehee. I don’t think it’s biblical though

  • Matthew

    Two thumbs up!

  • $144948586

    Why does supply or demand change though? We have to be specific, because the reason will determine how both customers and the entrepreneur react.

  • Matthew

    I guess I was simply thinking that as the demand for special education in the private sector goes up, so does the price.

  • Al Cruise

    Let’s share the real reason you endorse totally funded private schools especially the conservative religious brand . It’s to try and persevere your shrinking tribe. These schools are the aqua-fir for the white nationalist/supremacist movement, anti immigration, anti- gun control, destruction of government programs to help the poor, the ostracizing/persecution of LGBQT people, suppression of women’s rights, among other things.

  • $144948586

    Al Cruise, do motives change the fact that it’s extortion whose inflationary pressure leads to tax payers becoming poorer in real terms each year?

  • $144948586

    Well that really depends, though. The market already knows what demand will be for special education so entrepreneurs will have already set the price.

    The only reason demand for special education goes up is that a greater percentage of the population needs special education.

    That either means something else in our healthcare system is leading to handicaps, OR we’re allowing more ESL students in the school system.
    In the first case, school price is the least of concern.
    In the second case, well I’d venture a bet that such a significant number would lead to schools specializing in teaching ESL according to first language while also probably effectively teaching sciences better because of this gain in efficiency.

    Therefore, if costs go up so has quality and thus effectively bring down “real cost” (price per unit of quality).

  • Matthew

    My basic question … Josh … is what to do with families who need, but cannot afford, special education for their children in a “free market only, no taxation” model?

  • Al Cruise

    I your case, yes.

  • Ron McPherson

    Exactly. And it would affect ESL families as well. To think that immigrants and parents of highly disadvantaged children could afford to pay private tuition fees for their children’s education is absurd. Eliminating public education just means that disadvantaged children would no longer receive a decent education. That would in turn create larger societal inequities. How could anyone with any semblance of empathy for the least of these desire such a structure?

  • $144948586

    Facts don’t change, Al Cruise. But it’s noteworthy that you’d be willing to say based on the person you believe I am. How Christlike.

  • $144948586

    “is what to do with families who need, but cannot afford”
    Why can’t they afford it?

  • Matthew

    They don´t have enough money to pay the market rate?

  • seashell

    I didn’t expect to convert you, Josh. Just pointing out that privatization is not the utopia it’s cracked up to be and HOAs have had 50-60 years largely free from governmental interference to fail miserably on their own. Your concept of “voluntary agreement” is inadequate for the consumer choice models involved in HOAs, especially as many owners don’t receive the governing documents until closing. Worse, there are few regulations that require openness and transparency for the financial aspects resulting in embezzlements and fraud. Google HOA treasurer embezzlement for an idea of the scope and number of cases involved. As a former owner with beliefs just like yours said, My long held beliefs about the efficiency and cost effectiveness of businesses began to unravel as I watched a “privatized government” at work.

    Lastly, and this may disappoint you, I do live in a townhouse association that I’ve had no problems with, so this isn’t a personal vendetta against HOAs or privatization. But I’m aware of the pitfalls and dangers of these ‘communities’ and have researched the problems inherent in them for almost a decade.

  • $144948586

    Again, the reasons matter; this is why I’m asking these questions.
    I’m not being annoying; I’m saying the specifics of the situation matter.

    How do you know what the market rate is?
    Why is the market rate the price it is?

    Why don’t they have enough money?
    Are they low-income, if so, why?
    Are they the norm or are they below the national average?

    All these questions determine what an entrepreneur’s options are.
    Without specifics, all we’re doing is solving logic problems. But this isn’t a logic problem with a solution that works eternally; prices change, markets are dynamic so their solutions must be. As I said earlier, a solution that works today does not work tomorrow, so businesses, unlike public schools adapt.

    And how do I know this?

    Because, as I showed Ron:
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7596de80b92f5d37e4f7a06668a1276e44a6742120c5dc1baf4a9b7b792148e0.png

    This is a chart from microeconomics discussing economies of scale.
    What this means, simply, is that anywhere where costs have not reached their minimum, their is opportunity for someone else to enter the market and make a profit above and beyond the long run average cost.
    This is the basic principle that ensures the market reaches uniform prices; it’s the reason you pay practically the same price for sodas or salt at the grocery store.

    This principle applies to every single thing that is freely sold in the market place.

    Now, since the costs for public school consistently inflate faster than inflation, this means that they are to the right of the minimum cost and it’s getting even worse. This is a diseconomy of scale, and, if private companies were allowed to freely compete (that is also, that public schools could not extort money from everyone that isn’t purchasing their product), then an entrepreneur would have motivation to take advantage of the profit opportunity. You can see the borne out by Aldi, particularly, taking market share from WalMart even though WalMart revolutionized low prices.

  • $144948586

    “just pointing out that privatization is not the utopia it’s cracked up to be”
    I never said privatization is utopia, but HOA controlled neighborhoods are certainly better rent controlled apartments.

    “Your concept of “voluntary agreement” is inadequate for the consumer
    choice models involved in HOAs, especially as many owners don’t receive
    the governing documents until closing.”
    Nonsense; go on Zillow and it says “mandatory HOA”.

    “Worse, there are few regulations that require openness and transparency
    for the financial aspects resulting in embezzlements and fraud.”
    Embezzlement and fraud are naturally weaned against by free markets: Yelp, Amazon Reviews, Zillow Realtor ratings, Underwrite Labs (you lightbulbs) etc etc.

    “Google HOA treasurer embezzlement for an idea of the scope and number of cases involved.”
    Google Enron campaign contributions and Clinton allowing Enron to win a $3 billion dollar bid in India.

    “But I’m aware of the pitfalls and dangers of these ‘communities’ and
    have researched the problems inherent in them for almost a decade.”
    This doesn’t disappoint me; I’ve never said that bad people won’t do bad things. In fact, I push for free markets because I know that people are opportunistic; I also believe that honest business practice ultimately wins, because they must coax people into buying their goods….unlike government which has armies if all else fails.

    I’m sure some HOA’s do have problems, but if they persist then the developer will use a different administration. In addition, these people ultimately go to jail. The fact is though, developers voluntary use HOA’s as protection for their investment, and people voluntarily move into HOA neighborhoods and thus agree to the terms and conditions that may impede their rights. Admittedly, they may use them as further money making opportunities, but so what? It’s their property that they only agree to sell on condition that you pay their fee, to which buyers, again, voluntarily agree.

  • Al Cruise

    For out of the overflow of his heart his mouth speaks. You have spoken.

  • seashell

    Google Enron campaign contributions and Clinton allowing Enron to win a $3 billion dollar bid in India.
    Exactly! This is one of those government corruptions that the $90 Billion/yr ($5 Trillion in assets) HOA industry has adopted.

    Embezzlement and fraud are naturally weaned against by free markets: Yelp, Amazon Reviews, Zillow Realtor ratings, Underwrite Labs (you lightbulbs) etc etc.
    “Ah, I see”, said the blind man. Where exactly are you finding all these great reviews and stuff? Not on Amazon, not on Zillow etc etc. If anything, the embezzlements and fraud have gotten worse. That the perp may go to jail doesn’t take care of an association that can no longer provide the services like rooftop repair, sidewalks, streets etc etc and somehow declares bankruptcy which has the tendency to make the homeowners (not the Association – 2 different things) homeless.

    …I also believe that honest business practice ultimately wins, because they must coax people into buying their goods….unlike government which has armies if all else fails.
    Yeah, you keep on believing that, in the face of all evidence that says otherwise. Armies are only needed for the stupid predators. The smart ones use business.

  • $144948586

    And what have I said that implies that I’m for the white nationalist/supremacist
    movement, against immigration, for the ostracizing/persecution of LGBQT
    people, or fort suppression of women’s rights?

    Please quote me. If you can’t, you’re a liar and love is not in you.

    Concerning the other things, (gun control, government
    programs to help the poor), these, at this point of discussion don’t speak to what the oppressions that justify my stance.

  • $144948586

    “If anything, the embezzlements and fraud have gotten worse.”
    Proof?

    “That the perp may go to jail doesn’t take care of an association that
    can no longer provide the services like rooftop repair, sidewalks,
    streets etc etc and somehow declares bankruptcy which has the tendency
    to make the homeowners (not the Association – 2 different things)
    homeless.”
    Non-sense; if a Treasurer took money from an organization, he’d have to do it overtime lest get caught; if repairs suddenly stopped people would be suspicious and he’d be caught much faster.

    Rooftop repair, btw, is covered by home insurance, not the HOA–though it may be enforced by the HOA.

    Lastly, how does an HOA which files bankruptcy cause homeowners to be homeless?

    “Yeah, you keep on believing that, in the face of all evidence that says otherwise.”
    You mean like Amazon/JET, Monsanto/Baer, Walmart/Aldi, Home Depot/Lowes, Apple/Microsoft, Netflix/AmazonPrime, Google/Microsoft, Samsung/Apple?

    “The smart [governments] use business.”
    http://images.politico.com/global/2015/06/23/backpage-11601.jpg
    I beg to differ.

    “Google Enron campaign contributions and Clinton allowing Enron to win a $3 billion dollar bid in India.
    Exactly! This is one of those government corruptions that the $90 Billion/yr ($5 Trillion in assets) HOA industry has adopted.”
    For the record, this is an argument against government, not private business. Enron was thoroughly not private or voluntary, being heavily involved in government and energy regulation.

  • seashell
  • Al Cruise

    Then let’s hear you say it. Start with I Josh am for LGBQT rights. I Josh am for equal pay and opportunity for women. I Josh am for stronger gun control , that has universal back ground checks on everyone, closes all gun show loop holes and raises the age of purchase to 21 years old. These are just a few to start.

  • $144948586

    I’ve never been against LGBTQ rights, Al Cruise.

    But:

    I, Josh, am for LGBTQ rights*.
    I, Josh, am for equal pay for women**.
    I, Josh, am also for the businessman hiring who he wants at whatever rate he wants.***
    I, Josh, am for gun contol.****

    *I believe the right to love whomever you want is a natural right which exists outside of government. Therefore, government has no legitimate right to take that away. They should not determine who can and can’t be married either.

    **I believe this already exists, as the cited studies did not clarify the types of jobs men and women take. For instance, more women are public school teachers than men which is quite the low paying job.
    In the event I hire a male or female with equivalent skill, I will be willing to pay them the same.

    ***Who am I to tell another person how to manage his company?

    ****That is, if I’m selling a gun, I would only sell to whom I think is responsible enough to buy.

  • kaydenpat

    Good on your daughter and good on you for supporting her “civil disobedience”. I don’t understand why she has to be punished for exercising her right to protest but that’s just me. Those Parkland students have really shaken up this country and I salute them for being so brave and outspoken. The NRA has met its match.

  • Al Cruise

    Ok, now you need to state, I Josh recognize that the above things I stated need to have Government regulations supported with tax dollars to enforce them , because history shows without such Government regulation, injustice runs rampant.

  • Bones

    Yes all our private schools are in large regional or capital cities.

    No private school is going to set up in the many small isolated towns and aboriginal communities in the middle of our state.

    That will be up to Hitler and Capone because theres no money in it because capitalism cares so much.

  • Bones

    If he had a hint of integrity he’d leave and live on an island somewhere.

    But he doesnt.

    I suspect his family would miss government services.

  • $144948586

    “because history shows without such Government regulation”
    Like when?

  • Bones

    It’s called discrimination.

    Get over it, ffs.

  • Bones

    “That being said, you also weren’t forced to be a citizen of the community of Israel during this period. ”

    Really!!!!

    You mean the slaves who were forcibly circumcised…..

    So you would rather be in a theocracy which invades and commits genocide on other lands?

    You are truly bizarre.

  • Bones
  • Bones

    Derp, a private school is not administered by the government…..

    It can however receive public funding …..

    Since when is $20 000 half of $6 000?

    I wonder why private schools fees keep going up…and up….and up……

    The Rising Costs of Sending Your Kids to a Private School

    https://howmuch.net/articles/average-private-school-tuition-cost

    Gee there’s a surprise, it’s about rising administration costs….

    How inefficient…..

  • Ron McPherson

    “I, Josh, am for gun control… That is, if I’m selling a gun, I would only sell to whom I think is responsible enough to buy.”

    How could you adequately make such a determination, unless you’re just saying that as a gun shop owner you wouldn’t conduct business with strangers.

  • Ron McPherson

    LOLOL!!!!

  • Bones
  • Ron McPherson

    If Snapple Iced Tea isn’t selling at Walmart then they pull it off the shelves. When a third grader isn’t reading on grade level you can’t pull them off the shelf unless you’re just in education to make a profit…oh wait

  • $144948586

    You have the natural right to discriminate; that’s why you’re married to a woman and not a man, because you chose not to marry a man.

  • seashell

    That IS powerful. Thank you.

  • $144948586

    “Derp, a private school is not administered by the government…..”
    According to Google, this does not define a private school.

    “It can however receive public funding …..”
    This is, by Google definition, not private.

  • seashell

    Washington DC.

    An estimated 800,000 people. Way larger than Trump’s inauguration, btw. Americans care more for gun control than they do this President.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cc3eea596f60fa5d7de6a96a8746ba6bcdb0000195ddb53ae4846ac9dbe2d14a.jpg

  • $144948586

    “How could you adequately make such a determination”
    If I want to stay in business and have good customer feedback, then it’d be in my interest to make the best determination.

  • $144948586

    “When a third grader isn’t reading on grade level you can’t pull them off
    the shelf unless you’re just in education to make a profit…oh wait”
    If a school did such a thing, I’d be willing to step in and take the business.

  • $144948586

    “You mean the slaves who were forcibly circumcised…..”
    Admittedly, I don’t know all there is to about Jewish law concerning slaves(I’m sure you don’t either), but most, if not all, were slaves who got either consigned their rights to their master either through contract or through crime during this period.
    This also applies to non-Hebrew slaves, and as this site says, “it has been contended that no prisoners of war were ever taken into private slavery”
    http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/slavery-in-judaism

  • Ron McPherson

    For free? The child comes from a poor single working mom whose income goes to pay rent, utilities and groceries and cannot afford to pay tuition

  • Ron McPherson

    A man you’ve never seen walks into your gunshop to buy a weapon. How do you determine whether or not he is responsible?

  • $144948586

    How do schools determine stranger teachers aren’t pedos?

  • $144948586

    Why are her costs so high relative to income?

  • Bones

    “It would appear from Numbers 31:26–27 and Deuteronomy 20:10–11 that prisoners of war could be, and were, taken into bondage, but it has been contended that no prisoners of war were ever taken into private slavery (Kaufmann, Y., Toledot 1 (1937), 651).”

    The verses are explicit and you are suing them as an example of some utopic government.

    As for foreign slaves…..

    Foreign-Born Bondmen.
    The Israelite is permitted by Lev. xxv. 44-46 to buy bondmen and bondwomen (in the true sense of the word) from among the surrounding nations, or from the strangers dwelling in his land, and from the descendants of these born in the land; the “indwelling” stranger being distinguished from the stranger who lives under the same law as the Israelite. Such bondmen or bondwomen become a possession, and are inherited by children like other property. But the law limits the absolute power of the master. If he strikes his bondman or bondwoman so as to cause the loss of an eye or a tooth, he or she goes free. If he smites him or her so as to cause death on the same day, the deed is avenged as a murder; but not when death ensues on a subsequent day (Ex. xxi. 20, 21, 26, 27). Another alleviation of bondage is the law (Deut. xxiii. 16, 17) forbidding the return of a fugitive slave to his master by those among whom he seeks shelter. The religious status of bondmen owned by Israelites is well defined by the Scriptures, which make them an integral part of the community. The males, though of foreign blood, whether bought for money, or “born in the house,” are to be circumcised (Gen. xvii. 27; Ex. xii. 44), and when circumcised are to be admitted to eat of the Passover meal (ib.). Likewise the bondmen or bondwomen of a priest may eat of his holy meats (Lev. xxii. 11). Neither bondmen nor bondwomen are to be required to work on the Sabbath (Ex. xx. 10); indeed, the opportunity for the “son of thy handmaid” to have a “breathing-space” (A. V. “may be refreshed”) is mentioned as one of the great motives for the institution of the Sabbath (Ex. xxiii. 12).

    Canaanite Bondmen of the Talmud.
    In the Mishnah the bondman and bondwoman not of Hebrew blood are called briefly “Canaanites.” They are said to be bound, like women, by all the negative commandments, and by affirmative commandments not applying to stated times only. In the marriage laws, of course, they occupy a wholly different position from Israelites proper. Yet they are at least a subordinate part of the Jewish community; and not only are the males circumcised, but both males and females are received into the fold. Hence it is forbidden to sell a bondman or bondwoman to a Gentile (Giṭ. iv. 6), as he or she might thereby be driven into apostasy; but a transfer of the bondman’s services for a short time, or with a reservation of Sabbaths and festivals, is perhaps lawful (Giṭ. 46b). If a sale not thus restricted is carried into effect, the master will be compelled to redeem the slave even at tenfold the price received and to manumit him; and if a master borrows from a Gentile and offers his slave as a pledge which is to be forfeited to the lender in the case of non-payment at a specified time, the slave becomes free at once (Giṭ. 42a).

    Manumission of a Slave, Dated Cairo, 1087.(From the Cairo genizah.)
    It is unlawful to carry or to sell a Canaanite bondman from the Holy Land to another country (ib. iv. 6); and a man who acquires a slave in violation of this prohibition must manumit him. A difficult question once arose as the result of the marriage of a man residing in Babylonia to a Palestinian woman owning bondmen whom they took to his house (ib. 44b), there being doubt as to whom the penalty of the manumission of the bondmen should fall. “Syria” and even Acre (Acco) in Philistia were, as regards the prohibition, considered as outside of the Holy Land; and a Samaritan was considered a Gentile. The law in Deuteronomy against delivering up a fugitive slave is construed as applying to one who flees from a place outside of the Holy Land into it (Giṭ. 45a), which construction fits invery well with the words of the text. But the servant should give to the master a bond for his value. Should the master refuse to manumit the fugitive by deed, the court would simply protect the former bondman in his refusal to serve him.

    May Not Own Property.
    As under other systems of law in which slavery is recognized, the bondman or bondwoman may not acquire or own any property. What he finds or what is given to him by others (except to serve as price for his manumission) becomes at once the property of his master; and if he is injured in body, the damages must be paid to the master. He may not marry an Israelite woman, nor may a slave woman be married to a free Israelite; hence the rule adopted at the instance of the school of Shammai, that the master of a half-emancipated slave is compelled to manumit him (taking his bond for the other half); otherwise the man might not lawfully enter into any marriage (Giṭ. iv. 5).

    The law as to eye and tooth is extended to all “main limbs that do not come back,” e.g., ears, fingers, toes, nose, or male genitals; but is limited by some technical exceptions, as where the bondman belongs to part-owners, or to a husband in right of his wife. As the manumission works as a penalty on the master, it may be imposed by a court of ordained judges only, and upon the testimony of witnesses—not upon admission or confession, says Maimonides; but his glossarist (Joseph Caro, in “Kesef Mishneh”) points out that if the bondman is able, even for a moment, to justify his freedom, no court will take it from him. The child of a Canaanite bondwoman by an Israelite, even by her master, is a bondman or bondwoman. When manumitted, a Canaanite bondman or bondwoman becomes a “convert of righteousness,” and as such undergoes a second “baptism.”

    Where the master gives a freewoman in marriage to his bondman, or puts phylacteries on him, or causes him to read three verses from the Torah in public, his action is understood as freeing him, and he should give him a deed of manumission. According to the majority opinion, however, if the master goes through a form of betrothal with a bondwoman, the ceremony is of no significance unless he has previously manumitted her (Giṭ. 40a).

    Maimonides, at the close of his section on bondmen, declares that the Israelite should treat his slaves humanely, following the rules which Job imposed upon himself (Job xxxi. 12, 14); and he claims that cruelty is found only among idolatrous nations, not among the seed of Abraham.

    http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13799-slaves-and-slavery

  • Bones

    Trump hasn’t said anything because the NRA hasn’t told him what to say yet.

  • Bones

    They have background checks by the…..government…..

  • $144948586

    Similar solution, only privately done.

  • seashell

    And when the NRA does give him the talking points, what do you bet that Trump will bring up the size of his inauguration numbers again, too? The guy has an unhealthy obsession with size.

  • seashell

    How about Facebook? They’re already supply data to other governments.

  • $144948586

    “The verses are explicit and you are suing them as an example of some utopic government.”
    Nonsense; I’ve not made any claim to Utopia nor government. Utopia, for the record, is always a very authoritarian government; think Plato’s Republic.

    As for foreign slaves, I don’t believe it discusses how they were originally attained before being bought by Hebrews.
    This being said, of course it gave POW considerations, but that doesn’t mean it actually happened.

    That being said, if we’re talking about Caananites and needing a justification for losing their inalienable rights, there was that whole child sacrifice thing…

  • $144948586

    They supply data to the U.S. government, seashell. Don’t kid yourself.

    That being said, I don’t understand what you mean by “howabout Facebook?”

  • seashell

    For your privately done background checks on teachers to make sure they aren’t pedos. Of course, the private sector isn’t any better, and may be worse, than the government at keeping private info private along with other glitches.

  • $144948586

    “Of course, the private sector isn’t any better, and may be worse, than
    the government at keeping private info private along with other
    glitches.”
    This entire statement is taken on faith; name one instance in which the public sector has done things more efficiently than the private sector.

    EDIT:
    For the record, Facebook may be a good start to private sector background checks. I acknowledge first though that Facebook is hardly a company outside of government interest; they certainly provide your data to the government.

  • Matthew

    Thanks Josh. I think I basically get the economics (I took micro and macro in university … but it´s been a long time), but honestly, Josh, with all due respect, I think you are being unnecessarily complicated.

    Why not simply admit that in your world there will indeed be people who cannot afford to pay for private special education for their children, and that, in your world, that´s just too bad for them.

  • Ron McPherson

    So how much would YOU charge her then?

  • Ron McPherson

    Prospective teaching hires must undergo a series of interviews, background and fingerprint checks, along with drug screenings . Again though, the question to you was how you would assess whether your prospective customer was responsible enough to buy a gun.

  • Ron McPherson

    So as a gunshop owner are you saying you would contract with a private firm to conduct a background check on your prospective customer?

  • Desiderius Erasmus (mark)

    The supreme court has ruled that there are limits to the right to freedom of religious expression.

  • Desiderius Erasmus (mark)

    Do you mean pedophiles or child abusers? The former term gets thrown about because of the affective response it generates but does not contribute to the discussion. A very small fraction of child abusers are pedophiles so if those are the only ones you want to focus on, you are exposing your children to potential harm. In perms of the latter, background checks are done but the data indicates that at least as many offenses are new offenses rather than reoffenses. In other words, background checks are of limited value. It’s better to teach your kids about boundaries and what to do if those boundaries are violate.

  • Al Cruise
  • $144948586

    “Why not simply admit that in your world there will indeed be people who cannot afford to pay for private special education for their children, and that, in your world, that´s just too bad for them.”
    Because you’re taking this on the faith that this would be the result.
    But, more importantly, the world we do have is simply unsustainable, inefficient, and while kids get their education now in this system, it’s at the expense of future generations who must suffer further tax increases and thus impoverishes them…that is, until their economic system collapses under the liabilities we’ve placed on them.

  • $144948586

    I still gotta know what drives the costs and why it’s so expensive relative to her income.
    As of yet, you still haven’t explained the primary driver of public school tuition inflation (again, special ed–which includes ESL–is only 1-2% of a 6-7% in REAL INCREASE in education costs).

  • $144948586

    Same form of system, only privatized.

  • $144948586

    If my organization could come under fire (through poor customer reviews/being sued for irresponsibility–yes, law exists in private markets too) for not using such a system, yes.

  • $144948586

    Exactly, so in one case either a person has the right to freedom of religious expression or not. That’s called fascism.

  • Ron McPherson

    So in your world there is no government. The gunshop owner down the street from yours does not require his customers to undergo any kind of screening whatsoever, which means his customers can buy the same weapons cheaper than what you can sell (because in order to maintain a profit, you have to pass the cost of the background screenings onto your customers). Also, they can walk right into his shop and purchase the gun on the spot, whereas in your shop they would have to wait a week for the results of their screening to come back ok. Ultimately, the shop down the road drives you out of business.

  • $144948586

    “In other words, background checks are of limited value. It’s better to
    teach your kids about boundaries and what to do if those boundaries are
    violate.”
    The majority of murderers are by first time offenders to; preach to the anti-private business crowd above, then.

  • Ron McPherson

    I DID. I listed a myriad of reasons for you

  • $144948586

    “Ultimately, the shop down the road drives you out of business.”
    That depends; are his customers going out disproportionately murdering people so that people protest the store?

  • $144948586

    You haven’t given any prices concerning the proportion of tuition, Ron.

  • Desiderius Erasmus (mark)

    fascism covers the case of the right to religious freedom or not? What would not be fascism.
    In a constitutional republic your right to expression ends where my rights begin.

  • Desiderius Erasmus (mark)

    what’s the connection between anti private business (or pro private business) crowd to first time murderers?

  • Ron McPherson

    Go online and pick between the thousands of school systems and break their budgets down till your heart’s content. These aren’t widgets. This isn’t Walmart selling motor oil. Each school system grapples with its own set of dynamics.

  • Ron McPherson

    Who is going to know? There is no crime database cause police depts don’t exist. All I know is that I can buy the same gun from him cheaper than you

  • Ron McPherson

    “If my organization could come under fire (through poor customer reviews/being sued for irresponsibility–yes, law exists in private markets too) for not using such a system, yes.”

    How do you sue someone if there is no govt?

  • Ron McPherson

    Unbelievable

  • $144948586

    Ask the Judges of Israel; you know, back when God told them “I don’t want you to have a king.”

  • $144948586

    Ron your the one supporting extorting more money from the tax payer though school cant get their costs under control. You owe them an explanation if you demand their participation; the burden of proof is on you.

  • $144948586

    The discussion you addressed was how to validate someone’s reliability. It matters not if it centers on pedos or murderers; the same problem you apply to my statement extends to theirs.

  • $144948586

    I agree, now do you have a relevant scenario you would like to discuss?

  • Desiderius Erasmus (mark)

    The issue I addressed was about words. Words have power.
    Once again: what’s the connection between anti private business (or pro private business) crowd to first time murderers?

  • Ron McPherson

    We can debate what constitutes a govt ad nauseam. The question originally posed is do you support gun control. Your response indicated gun control to you meant assessing whether or not a customer was responsible enough to purchase a gun. Let me cut right to the chase here. Do you feel that the govt should be able to tightly regulate the selling of a firearm to another?

  • Desiderius Erasmus (mark)

    One person’s right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness versus another person’s religious belief that same sex couple’s should not marry.
    One couple who’s religious faith does not oppose same sex marriage being prohibited from doing so because of another belief that prohibits it.
    One person’s sincere religious belief that religion should be taught in public schools and another’s belief that it shouldn’t.
    One person’s religious belief that a man can marry multiple women and another’s belief that he can’t (which was adjudicated by the supreme court)
    One person’s sincerely held religious belief that it is their G-D given right to have any type of firearm they want and another’s belief that to do so can be morally unacceptable.
    One person’s right to be treated equally under the law and another person’s belief that they are entitled to deny services because of membership in a protected class.

  • $144948586

    To answer your specific question: no.

  • $144948586

    I just told you.

  • Ron McPherson

    Um, I’m not trying to wrestle a damn penny away from you Josh. I’m not protesting to have your taxes raised. I have no idea where you live, know nothing about your community’s current tax base, know nothing of how many dollars of that tax base goes to public schools in your area, and know nothing about the needs of your particular school nor how they spend your money. My point in this whole convo is calling BS on you broadbrushing all forms of public education and its employees as being evil with out of control spending. You’ve already demonstrated your knowledge is grossly limited in the education industry. I pointed out some of your fallacies.

    If I was going before the legislative body in your county to advocate for more resources, then rest assured I would give due diligence in providing a clear explanation of where the dollars would be spent and what we hoped to attain by them. Seeing as that is not my intent here, I feel no inclination in spending hours of my time on the Internet trying to convince an anarchist why my employees were not criminals.

  • Ron McPherson

    Do you believe the government should have the right to regulate (under ANY form) the selling of a firearm to another?

  • $144948586

    “There is no crime database cause police depts don’t exist.”
    That’s just not true.

  • Desiderius Erasmus (mark)

    so I will assume that there is no connection between private business (pro or anti) and first time murderers.
    The “problem” I applied to your statement was mis-use of language.

  • Ron McPherson

    So you advocate for some forms of govt but not all?

  • $144948586

    “One person’s right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness versus
    another person’s religious belief that same sex couple’s should not
    marry.
    One couple who’s religious faith does not oppose same sex marriage being
    prohibited from doing so because of another belief that prohibits it.”
    Who’s stopping gay couples from marrying?

    “One person’s sincere religious belief that religion should be taught in public schools and another’s belief that it shouldn’t.”
    The problem with public school is not this issue; it’s the issue that people are forced to buy a product they either don’t like or don’t use.

    “One person’s religious belief that a man can marry multiple women and
    another’s belief that he can’t (which was adjudicated by the supreme
    court)”
    It’s actually faiths with adherentsthat believe this.

    “One person’s sincerely held religious belief that it is their G-D given
    right to have any type of firearm they want and another’s belief that to
    do so can be morally unacceptable.”
    So long as the first person is not violating the latter’s right to life, what’s the problem?

    “One
    person’s right to be treated equally under the law and another person’s
    belief that they are entitled to deny services because of membership in
    a protected class.”
    Actually, the right to discriminate is protected under the law: you can determine who comes in your home. Why can’t you do the same for your business, both of which are your property?

  • $144948586

    “My point in this whole convo is calling BS on you broadbrushing all
    forms of public education…with out of
    control spending”
    That’s exactly what we have, though.

  • $144948586

    What’s your definition of government?

  • $144948586

    Depends on the definition of government; governing organizations in which it’s subjects are all voluntary (like an HOA), sure. And they can hire police to keep things orderly.

  • Desiderius Erasmus (mark)

    Who’s stopping gay couples from marrying?
    Currently, nobody.

    It’s actually faiths with adherentsthat believe this.
    and it’s actually the adherants who believe this who SCOTUS said can’t do it.

    The problem with public school is not this issue; it’s the issue that
    people are forced to buy a product they either don’t like or don’t use.
    Homeschooling is always an option.

    Actually, the right to discriminate is protected under the law: you can
    determine who comes in your home. Why can’t you do the same for your
    business, both of which are your property?
    Restrict your business to your personal friends and it’s not an issue. Open it to the public and it becomes an issue.

  • Ron McPherson

    Government in its existing form

  • $144948586

    You concluded with, “In other words, background checks are of limited value. It’s better to
    teach your kids about boundaries and what to do if those boundaries are
    violate.”

    In which case, these sentences have no relevance to your conclusion, they only serve to try and negate my argument. Worse, it’s dishonest argument as the choice of words matters not to the purpose of discussion which is: private businesses can do the same things the Ron derides, privately, that public institutions must do.

  • $144948586

    The no; it extorts..

  • $144948586

    “Who’s stopping gay couples from marrying?
    Currently, nobody”
    Then quit griping about hypotheticals.

    “It’s actually faiths with adherentsthat believe this.
    and it’s actually the adherants who believe this who SCOTUS said can’t do it.”
    And to them, I argue the same: “Government bad, private good.”

    “Homeschooling is always an option.”
    No it’s not, because they are still required to buy a product they don’t use nor like.

    “Restrict your business to your personal friends and it’s not an issue.”
    Thank you for admitting business owners have the right to discriminate.

  • Ron McPherson

    It’s “out of control spending” you conclude, yet you admit in your line of questioning that you don’t really know how the money is spent.

  • $144948586

    Ron, one doesn’t need to know everything they bought to know there checking balance is negative. That’s a ridiculous line or argument.

    As we’ve discussed, we know:
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7596de80b92f5d37e4f7a06668a1276e44a6742120c5dc1baf4a9b7b792148e0.png

    We know that the spending is inflating faster than economy-wide inflation (and faster than “private” solutions).

    We don’t need to know what is too much to know it’s total is too much.

  • Desiderius Erasmus (mark)

    The discussion was your word choice. Whatever discussion you were having with Ron is for the two of you to argue about.

  • Desiderius Erasmus (mark)

    The only product that you are required to buy in homeschooling is an education. You are free to provide that however you choose–as long as it’s provided.
    Business, by definition, are open to the public. Those can’t discriminate.
    Bake for your friends, don’t call it a business

  • $144948586

    Then don’t conclude with something that has nothing to do with word choice.

  • Ron McPherson

    Well the “checking balance” isn’t in the negative since bouncing checks in tge public education sector isn’t happening; speaking of “ridiculous lines” lol.

    As for your “private solutions”, I call total BS. Show me a private education system that educates special needs students, economically disadvantaged children, feeds them, and provides instructional interventions (ie all of those within the same system), nursing services, occupational and physical therapy, hearing, vision, and speech therapy, along with supporting the ESL population and transporting the children to and from school, cleaning and maintaining the facilities, doing all those things with a built in profit margin, and doing it cheaper than public schools.

  • $144948586

    “The only product that you are required to buy in homeschooling is an education.”
    You either don’t know how public-school funding works, or you’re a liar.

    If I homeschool my child, I’m still forced to pay for the public school down the street. Thus, I’m buying a product I don’t use nor want.
    So this whole, “Homeschooling is always an option” is as dishonest as your support for freedom of religious expression.

    Homeschooling is an option only for those who can afford homeschooling AFTER paying for the public school down the street.

    “Business, by definition, are open to the public. Those can’t discriminate.”
    Why not? It’s the owner’s private property just like their home is.

    If you say, “Bake for your friends, don’t call it a business”
    Then you can’t say what you said earlier: “Restrict your business to your personal friends and it’s not an issue.”

  • $144948586

    “Well the “checking balance” isn’t in the negative since bouncing checks in tge public education sector isn’t happening”
    Wanna act your age and stick to the point of the story. Might as well say, “Well schools spending isn’t happening because schools aren’t human.
    But you’re right; they just ask for more tax payer funding.

    “and doing it cheaper than public schools.”
    I’d love too, but, again, public schools are busy crowding out the private sector by forcing people to pay for their inefficiency.

  • Ron McPherson

    Act my age lol. You’re the one who disingenuously claimed that the checking balance was in the negative. Don’t bring your toys to the sandbox if you’re not going to share.

    Tell ya what. You should open up your own private school network. You know so much about how to educate children better and cheaper, you’d make a killing at it. You can thank me later.

    You know that spending is outta control, though you don’t know what they spend their dollars on. You know that administrative costs at every public school system in America is overblown, but you can’t tell which districts they are and which positions. You know that special education students can be educated cheaper by a for-profit firm than a non -profit public school even though private firms would build in a profit margin. You know that children can be fed cheaper by a private firm even though school lunches already are cheaper than any restaurant in town. You know that ESL students can be educated cheaper by a private for-profit firm cheaper than in the public sector. You know that custodial services would be cheaper from a for-profit company, all while providing the same level of service to the facility. You know that all therapeutic services could be performed cheaper.

    All roofs and major renovations could be done cheaper in spite of systems taking advantage of municipal bond financing terms. Nursing services cheaper. Same with all interventions. And on and on.

    Josh could do all this, educate all students turning none away, build in his profit margin, and even realize economies of scale while doing it all.

    Yeah, Josh already knows that all public schools just recklessly spend money because that’s what “evil mobster extortionists” just naturally do. You could do all this, contract all these services out to private firms, do it cheaper while getting a profit to boot. It’s so easy, you could just manage the whole system and sit back and count your money. Does that sound about right?

  • $144948586

    “Act my age lol. You’re the one who disingenuously claimed that the checking balance was in the negative.”
    That wasn’t the point of the story, and you know it. The point was, I don’t need to itemize to know I’m spending too much.

    “You should open up your own private school network. You know so much
    about how to educate children better and cheaper, you’d make a killing
    at it.”
    I would, but then your school would tell my teachers they still gotta pay their portion.

    Paraphrase: “You know that all forms of education could be done cheaper.”
    It’s microeconomic principle:
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7596de80b92f5d37e4f7a06668a1276e44a6742120c5dc1baf4a9b7b792148e0.png

    This principles says, “competitors will enter and undercut your prices.”
    This is public school.

    “You could do all this, contract all these services out to private firms, do it cheaper while getting a profit to boot.”
    Damn straight.

    “Josh already knows that all public schools just recklessly spend money
    because that’s what “evil mobster extortionists” just naturally do.”
    No, that’s what government employees with budgets funded by extortion d; the principle is also true for other government funded entities to, including medicine and fire/police departments

  • Ron McPherson

    Josh, I’m sorry, but your comments throughout this entire thread with respect to the public education sector reveal a basic lack of understanding of how the education industry works.

    Spend some time trying to get a working knowledge of the myriad challenges the education industry faces. Spend some time in school settings, not the ones who get to select their own clientele, but a public one that must educate every student who comes through their doors, whether special needs, socially and economically disadvantaged, those that cannot yet speak English, those who have learning disabilities and require intervention services. You’re not going to find such a diverse population in private school settings.

    Spend time learning about a school systems central administration. What the do and why they do it. Why the jobs are necessary. What these people make in relation to what many could make in the private sector.

    In other words, educate yourself in these areas before trying to educate others who have lived it.

  • Ron McPherson

    “I don’t need to itemize to know I’m spending too much.”

    This is an astounding claim.

    I can see it now. I say to my wife, “Honey I don’t know what you’re buying but I know that you spent too much money today.”

    She says, “well dear, all I paid is this months mortgage, paid the utility bill, and bought pork and beans for supper tonight.”

    I say, “Oh yeah, I don’t want to know the details, all I know is you spent too much.”

    My wife then says, “so which expense should I not have paid?”

    I say, “I don’t know, but all I know is that you spent too much money.”

    She says, “well what makes you think I spent too much money?”

    I say, “cause our neighbors don’t spend that much.”

    She says, “but they don’t have a mortgage; their parents bought their home for them.”

    I say, “well all I know is that they have more money than we have so we must be doing something wrong”

    My wife says, “um, ok” (and walks way rolling her eyes)

  • $144948586

    “Josh, I’m sorry, but your comments throughout this entire thread with
    respect to the public education sector reveal a basic lack of
    understanding of how the education industry works.”
    It’s a business, Ron. It’s not immune to the practical limitations of economics. If they can build an app that can translate spoken language or build AI that can fain consciousness, they can teach a 10 year old.

    It’s not sending rockets to space.
    It’s not performing heart surgery.
    It’s not organizing a prime time billion dollar game complete with properly running commercials all the while maintaining fan interest while catering to the needs of superstars.

    But what it is:
    It is taking children who can generally count and know there letters and somewhat read at 5 years old, teaching them to perform basic arithmetic and comprehension by sending them home with homework so their parents are responsible for having them do it.
    It is taking ESL kids with parents who often lack any English ability and placing them, unfairly, with fluent English speakers so that a teacher must straddle the needs of two kids with two very different trajectories. Thus causing the both children to under perform, and doing the ESL child a disservice by only teaching in English, generally, so that math is harder, history is harder, science is harder, and reading is harder
    It is dealing with PTA and hearing parents gripe and moan about their child’s performance while also telling them: “Don’t forget, you owe us your payment by April 1st.”

    But what it is not:
    IT IS NOT fair to teachers, parents, and, worst of all, the kids.

  • $144948586

    “She says, “well dear, all I paid is this months mortgage, paid the utility bill, and bought pork and beans for supper tonight.””
    You are aware that people overextend on mortgages and utilities bills, yes?
    That’s called, “Get a smaller home, cut down electricity usage, or get a better job.”
    That’s called being responsible.

    There for no, “This is NOT an astounding claim.”

    If you’re spending too much, it doesn’t matter what it’s spent on. It’s unsustainable.

  • Ron McPherson

    Wow, would have ever thought it really is this simple?

  • Ron McPherson

    ok Josh

  • $144948586
  • $144948586
  • $144948586
  • Ron McPherson

    Ok Josh

  • Ron McPherson

    Uh huh, ok Josh

  • Ron McPherson

    Ok Josh

  • Desiderius Erasmus (mark)

    The concluding comment had everything to do with the word choice.

  • Desiderius Erasmus (mark)

    I don’t know what state you are in but here homeschoolers get a tax credit for what would otherwise go to the school system.

    A business isn’t private property

  • $144948586

    No, it did not.

  • Desiderius Erasmus (mark)

    I am sorry if you failed to grasp the significance.
    That doesn’t mean that there was none.

  • $144948586

    “https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2013/03/13/ask-the-taxgirl-do-homeschooling-expenses-qualify-as-an-educator-expense/#657098087d4e”
    “The value of the deduction is up to $250 for expenses for books,
    supplies, computer equipment, other equipment, and supplementary
    materials used in the classroom which are paid for by an “eligible
    educator.””
    Big whoop.

    “A business isn’t private property”
    This is news; either
    the private individual owning the business either bought the real estate,
    or the private individual bought a building in a business development from a private real estate developer.

  • Desiderius Erasmus (mark)

    A private person buying a property for the sake of a public business does not make the PROPERTY private.
    Buying the property for the sake of a public business from a private realtor doesn’t make the PROPERTY private.

    $250–what percentage of your property tax does that represent? If it was my property taxes, that’s about what I’d be contributing towards the school system. And I have no children.

  • Desiderius Erasmus (mark)

    As far as your link, that’s federal taxes. Public education is funded out of property tax and any tax credit would be at the state level. That $250, I believe, was intended to reimburse teachers for out of pocket expenses (that should have been paid by the school department). Do you think the average public school teacher donates more than that?

  • $144948586

    “A private person buying a property for the sake of a public business does not make the PROPERTY private.

    Buying the property for the sake of a public business from a private realtor doesn’t make the PROPERTY private.”
    The property is inherently private before the transaction, er go you’d have to claim that it is transformed to public property.

    “If it was my property taxes, that’s about what I’d be contributing towards the school system.”
    You contribute much more than $250 to your school from property taxes, but that’s the general amount you get for home school credits.

  • Desiderius Erasmus (mark)

    What the property was before the transaction is irrelevant to what it is after the transaction.
    In any event, making it a business, by definition public, you have made the property something other than private.

    $250 is about what I pay towards education through property taxes.
    The link you gave wasn’t “home school credit” it was “educator credit.”

  • Matthew

    Is there a way to test your “no taxation, free market” model in order to see what would happen to those special needs families I am speaking of?

  • Matthew

    Most of those kids are going to be eligible to vote soon. Things will change …

  • Bones

    Lol and this from a guy who wonders why people have low incomes yet is against minimum wages.

  • Bones

    Yeah nice graph…

    It applies to private schools too….you know the ones that have increased by $20 000 compared to public schools $ 6 000.

    Lol…students are now treated as commodities.

  • Bones

    N doubt to make up for the insecurity of having a tiny penis.

  • Bones

    Lol, no surprise for you using dishonest fake news…..

    What You Need To Know About Misleading Education Graphs, In Two Graphs

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e0fdfb3427d99209b261635b78bff93eaf1ae3a1fa00d2bf597f5099bd3b3c2c.png

    This graph has many of the same measurement issues (e.g., see here and here), and takes essentially the same approach as in the ASCD figure – comparing changes in NAEP with other indicators, in this case K-12 spending and the number of education employees, in order to make a causal pseudo-argument. This time, however, the implied direction of causality is reversed – instead of making an argument about whether testing results have any influence (e.g., on productivity/GDP), the idea here is that spending and hiring do not influence testing results.

    If we have a little fun and take these two figures at face value, we might conclude that key inputs such as spending have no effect on (testing) outcomes, which in turn have no effect on economic performance. The policy implications of this story are, to put it mildly, frustrating.

    To have even more fun, and to illustrate further the severe limitations of this approach, one could create a hybrid of these two graphs, in which rising education spending and hiring are presented alongside increasing GDP and productivity, with the “conclusion” being that education spending and hiring leads directly to economic growth/productivity. Alternatively, we might juxtapose the flat trend in 17-year old Long Term NAEP scores with a similarly stagnant measure such as real wages (i.e., flat test scores “cause” flat wages). But we’d be no closer to understanding the situation.

    Look, there is, of course, more than a grain of truth in the (almost entirely obscured) nuanced version of both graphs’ underlying arguments. For example, as noted above, there is a case to be made that test scores are a highly imperfect proxy for the countless factors that contribute to GDP and productivity (and, by the way, GDP and productivity are themselves imperfect proxies for economic performance). Similarly, the evidence is clear that adequate funding for schools is a necessary but still insufficient condition for improving student performance, and that how schools spend money is as important as how much they spend.

    But that’s what makes oversimplified, sensationalist graphs like these so exasperating. Instead of promoting a discussion about finding better ways to spend money or the importance of tracking and understanding the factors that influence growth and productivity, these graphs seem intended to start a conversation by ending it, right at the outset, in a manner that typically is compelling only to those who already agree with the conclusions.

    http://www.shankerinstitute.org/blog/what-you-need-know-about-misleading-education-graphs-two-graphs

  • Bones

    So like Iran then?

    “” Moses selected “able men out of all Israel and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens; and they judged the people at all seasons:”: the more important [A. V. “hard”] causes they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves” (Ex. xviii. 25, 26; comp. Deut. i. 15). It is also recorded that Moses once appointed Aaron and Hur to act as chief judges in his absence (Ex. xxiv. 14).

    You are aware that this amounts to a dictatorship like Nazi Germany.

    Seems like a government to me….controlled by one man….

    I’m not surprised that libertarians long for dictatorships.

  • Bones

    Derp, a private school is not administered by the government….eg Catholic Schools.

    They do however receive public funding.

    They are NOT public schools.

  • Bones
  • Bones

    “Nonsense; I’ve not made any claim to Utopia nor government. ”

    Well yes you did.

    You think the Old testament is a model for modern government. Then tried to squirm out of the whole slavery thing.

    2 things
    1) They had foreign slaves….many of whom were bought and sold as property…even the slaves children were slaves….

    2) If you don’t believe the accounts how the f*** can you use it as a basis of government.

    “That being said, if we’re talking about Canaanites and needing a justification for losing their inalienable rights, there was that whole child sacrifice thing…”

    Oh yeah there’s that piece of apologetic nonsense.

    Not much of a libertarian now hey, killing little boys and ripping open pregnant women and taking virgins to do what you want with when the story is actually about the Israelites claiming the land of other tribes. You know because that’s what they set out to do.

  • Bones

    They can work in mines and cotton mills……

  • Bones

    There’s no doubt about it.

    Your politicians are f***ed in the head.

  • Bones

    Lol I have a major in Stats…..You can manipulate the axes to show whatever you went. The scores aren’t flat at all……

    I wonder why institutions like Cato lie…..to fulfill the fantasies of people like yourself no doubt….

    How to manipulate data and figures
    By Sherman Dorn on March 10, 2012

    On occasion, students and reporters ask me what makes me trust or distrust folks who claim to be education researchers, and it’s a harder question to answer than one might think. As an historian with some quantitative training, I am eclectic on methods–I have no purity test other than “the evidence and reasoning have to fit the conclusion.” It’s not the existence of error: even great researchers make occasional errors, and it’s a good thing in the long run for researchers to take intellectual risks (which imply likely error/failure). Further, we all have the various myside biases cognitive psychologists write about.

    But when I come across something like the following produced by the Cato Institute’s Andrew Coulson and displayed by Matthew Ladner twice on Jay Greene’s blog (including on Thursday), I start to wonder. Here’s Coulson’s chart:

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b20d1f6c659ba4e0924242e261240c5e32598e82a19c7f9389c781b774d36b6c.jpg

    Look at both vertical edges, and you will see that this is a two-vertical-axis chart, with the per-pupil costs on the left and some (unstated) measure of achievement that is labeled “[subject] scores” in percentage terms. Because one can often manipulate units and axes to leave almost any impression one might wish, I wondered if I could use the same underlying data to leave the opposite impression.

    First, once I looked at Table 182 from the 2009 Digest of Educational Statistics, it became clear that the cost figure increases (supposedly the total cost of a K-12 education taken by multiplying per-pupil costs by 13) are false. If you look at the columns in the linked data (Table 182), the per-pupil costs when adjusted for inflation approximately double rather than triple as asserted in this figure. Second, there is no possible source for the approximate “0%” line from NAEP long-term trends data, unless there is an additional calculation unexplained by Coulson.

    But let’s look at the real data and see if you can manipulate that to leave an opposite impression:

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/948eaff65f45df6d464decac95be3c44154ffe61709cf0f854138740b3622280.png

    Whoa, Nelly! It looks at first glance from this figure that Coulson’s dead wrong: when comparing the trend lines for per-pupil costs after inflation (the green line: like that, green = money?) to reading (blue) and math (brown) trends, it looks like reading trends may not be great, but math looks to have had a pretty good return on the total investment in all K-12 education.

    How did I manipulate the data to get this result? First, I chose a measure of per-pupil expenditure change that was both acceptable academically and also would shrink the apparent change: the natural log of the ratio of current per-pupil expenditures to 1971-72 per-pupil expenditures. Then I put average NAEP long-term scale scores on another academically-acceptable measure, using the starting scale score for the interval as 100 for each subject and age (1971 mean scale = 100 in reading, 1978 mean scale = 100 in math). Then I made sure the vertical axes had the “right” low-high range to contrast the greatest increases in NAEP trends (math for 9- and 13-year-olds) with a visually-shrunken per-pupil trend line: the vertical scale on the left included nothing more than the total range of the re-calculated trend scores, while the vertical scale on the right was just a little more than twice the range of the natural log of the expenditure ratios. Voila!: a figure that looks like it shows the exact opposite of what Coulson’s figure looks like it shows. Addendum 1: Two commenters misunderstood my point even with the phrase “manipulate the data” in the first sentence of this paragraph. So maybe I should make clear that, yes, the figure I prepared is also a demonstration of what not to do, except that in contrast with Andrew Coulson, I am telling you exactly how I am making the pretty colors dance to my tune. Addendum 2: Ladner responds, arguing that I am missing the forest for the trees. Or maybe that I am dodging the point, or dodging the trees (dodging a forest would be much more difficult, as some folks in Middle-Earth found out). That might be the case if my point here is about some measure of productivity. But it isn’t; it’s about presentation of data. In general, I think it’s wise to separate discussions of this sort from the substantive question. On that, it is fair to ask questions about whether or what part of the rising per-pupil spending on schooling in the past 40 years has been a good investment.1 Addendum 3: Coulson responds. I’ll let the difference between the data trees and chart manipulation forest here be an exercise for the reader, and the trees have some problems, too.2

    This manipulation of data and presentation by Coulson is the type of behavior that makes me distrust not only the piece in which something like this appears but the broader work of an individual.

    http://shermandorn.com/wordpress/?p=4675

  • Matthew

    Josh won´t admit that there is a chance special needs children will be left out in the cold in a “no taxation, free market” model. I´m waiting for him to admit that.

  • Bones

    Oh a chart…..I’ve taught lessons on this in elementary school…….

    How to manipulate data and figures

    “This manipulation of data and presentation by Coulson (Cato) is the type of behavior that makes me distrust not only the piece in which something like this appears but the broader work of an individual.”

    http://shermandorn.com/wordpress/?p=4675

    Yep…….

  • Bones

    This chart appears on

    Dumbest “real” reformy graphs!

    Hat tip to Bob Calder on Twitter, for finding an even more absurd representation of pretty much the same graph used by Gates above. This one comes to us from none other than Andrew Coulson of Cato Institute. Coulson has a stellar record of this kind of stuff. So, what would you do to the Gates graph above if you really wanted to make your case that spending has risen dramatically and we’ve gotten no outcome improvement? First, use total rather than per pupil spending (and call it “cost”) and then stretch the scale on the vertical axis for the spending data to make it look even steeper. And then express the achievement data in percent change terms because NAEP scale scores are in the 215 to 220 range for 4th grade reading, for example, but are scaled such that even small point gains may be important/relevant but won’t even show as a blip if expressed as a percent over the base year.

    https://schoolfinance101.wordpress.com/2011/04/08/dumbest-real-reformy-graphs/

  • Ron McPherson

    Exactly. It’s just ridiculous to think that a purely for-private school structure could somehow meet the needs of special needs children without charging astronomical prices. It stretches the bounds of incredulity that he either can’t, or simply won’t, see it. The costs would have to be enormous, otherwise the return on investment just isn’t worth it for a for-profit model. And economies of scale doesn’t work in a school setting like it would with Walmart selling DVDs. For instance, special needs children require individual instruction plans. You can’t just sling 30 SPED kids into a room with a single teacher and expect teaching and learning to occur. It’s just patently absurd to think it. It doesn’t bother me that folks don’t understand the educational landscape in today’s environment. That’s ok. There are a whole lot of industries that I don’t understand either. But what does bother me is when people who obviously do not grasp the complexities of the education environment confronting school systems today somehow assume a posture of authority and arrogance in presuming to know how to fix it.

  • Ron McPherson

    Ok, this was brilliant!

  • Ron McPherson

    LOL!!!

  • Ron McPherson

    Is this what as a$$ kicking looks like lol?

  • $144948586

    “I’ve taught lessons on this in elementary school…
    How to manipulate data and figures”
    Of this, I have no doubt.

  • $144948586

    “You think the Old testament is a model for modern government.”
    Could you be any more paradoxical?

    “Not much of a libertarian now hey, killing little boys and ripping open pregnant women and taking virgins to do what you want with when the story is actually about the Israelites claiming the land of other tribes.”
    Of course, Corey and his ilk would doubt such genocides actually took place.
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/formerlyfundie/facts-christians-know-bibles-canaanite-genocide/

    But again, there was that whole child sacrifice thing…

  • $144948586

    A tad unfair.

  • $144948586

    “You are aware that this amounts to a dictatorship like Nazi Germany.”
    No; Moses didn’t make them come out of Egypt.

  • $144948586

    Sure; abolition mandatory public school taxation.

  • $144948586

    “They are NOT public schools.”
    Yet receive public funding; Google definition, hmmm.
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ba60d9461fb14daa0256d4047cd79ebbc220f917c23cd1c928357f8141b58cb2.jpg

  • $144948586

    Bones, it’s a percentage (and thus comparable only to itself.
    As a commenter noted on that stupid chart:
    “Isn’t this more misleading, though? Taking the log of expenditures obviously mutes any rise (doubling real spending from $5,000 to $10,000 makes the natural log rise only by 8% or so). As a society, we care about what we’re actually spending. We don’t report government budgets in terms of what they’re the log of, and I’m not sure why the log of spending would ever be used for anything except if you think there’s a multiplicative relationship or if you want to interpret a parameter in terms of percentages.”

    The writer’s response, “Yes, that’s the point: anyone can manipulate the presentation of data with multiple axes to present conclusions that one wants to draw, as Coulson did.”

    His wasn’t to make a proof, but just to understand that “anyone can manipulate data.”
    In this case, the Blogger is just misleading.

  • Ron McPherson

    Google this:
    “Do private schools receive government funding.”

    And this is the first thing that pops up:
    “Private schools are almost fully funded by tuition fees paid by students’ parents, but they do receive some government subsidies.”

    And this literally changes nothing about the definition of private schools in your little pic above. You just don’t understand what it’s saying. You’re still confused on the meaning of the words “supported” and “rather.” I pointed this out to you last week. Fell on deaf ears I see. You get additional points though for stubbornness.

  • Matthew

    Then what?

  • $144948586

    Failing schools will fail because an entrepreneur can provide the same service for cheaper.

  • $144948586

    “And this literally changes nothing about the definition of private schools in your little pic above.”
    Except that it means that they’re not private.

  • seashell

    An article from The Atlantic by a radiologist at one of Parkland’s trauma centers, What I Saw Treating the Victims From Parkland Should Change the Debate on Guns, tells of the trauma surgeon waiting for his own kids at the school the day of the shooting. Even as the first responders brought out victims, this trained trauma surgeon could do nothing to help them because the wounds were caused by a deadly AR-15. And Santorum thinks a class in CPR would make a difference? Time to Google Bomb the real meaning of Santorum again. See: Why Rick “Man on Dog” Santorum can’t beat his Google troubles.

  • seashell

    OMG. Perfectly and beautifully pulled off, Bones. Hats off and congratulations. Open the champagne for you and Ron, and don’t forget the popcorn.

  • Ron McPherson

    So Josh accepts a Google definition when he believes it supports his assertion, but Josh rejects a Google definition when it shows he was mistaken. Ok

  • $144948586

    No, I accept that private businesses have no right to extort money like a gangster.

  • Ron McPherson

    So now we’re back to Josh making up his own definitions then. Would have been nice had you just owned it from the beginning instead of trying to use Google to validate your misunderstanding.

  • Ron McPherson

    “Failing schools will fail because an entrepreneur can provide the same service for cheaper.”

    Do you just pretend that special needs students don’t exist? The entrepreneur has no incentive to educate ALL students like public education does because of the lousy return on investment. He would go out of business trying to do it cheaper. You don’t get into education for the money.

    One cannot implement meaningful economies of scale for a gigantic section of SPED students, economically disadvantaged students, students requiring one on one intervention, students requiring therapeutic services, feeding the entire student body (including those who cannot afford it), etc.

  • Al Cruise

    I think you’re starting to see real fear in the GOP about their fate in future elections.

  • $144948586

    “The entrepreneur has no incentive to educate ALL students like public education does because of the lousy return on investment.”
    If he tried to do it all under one roof, perhaps.

    There’s still money to be made on special needs (the vast majority of which are just ESL kids).

    “One cannot implement meaningful economies of scale for a gigantic section of SPED students, economically disadvantaged students, students requiring one on one intervention, students requiring therapeutic services, feeding the entire student body (including those who cannot afford it), etc.”
    Completely taken on faith and ignorant of the fact that it is through extortion of the free market that the government affords to do these things.
    And, according to all the research, does it at a higher cost than any other industry would get because, surprise, government doesn’t care to negotiate–they just care about paying higher salaries than their private sector employees whom they exploit.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/04/25/federal-employee-pay-benefits-ahead-of-private-sector-on-average-cbo-concludes/?utm_term=.3357205060f0

  • $144948586
  • Ron McPherson

    Would somebody please tell Josh that continuing to post this image actually makes him look worse, not better lol

  • Ron McPherson

    Sure Josh

  • seashell

    I still remember the 2006 midterms where we kicked ass, but lately it seems no low for the Republicans is too low. I hope you’re right, Al.

  • Bones

    Yep..
    It’s easy to pick up bs graphs by manipulating axes to make them look however you want.

    And it says a lot about the honesty of the person presenting them.

    Surprised you didnt know that in your maths masters.

  • Bones

    You’ve repeated more than once that the Old Testament period of judges is your preferred model of government.

    Once again this was borne out of dictatorships and conquest.

    And the whole child sacrifice thing is an excuse for cutting little boys throats….when it was all about taking over the land promised to them.

    You’d probably shoot Injuns too.

  • seashell

    Wait. Is Josh talking about libertarianism or Christian Dominionism?

  • $144948586

    “And the whole child sacrifice thing is an excuse for cutting little boys
    throats….when it was all about taking over the land promised to them.”
    Your leader doesn’t believe this happened; please see above.

  • $144948586

    “Yep”
    Thank you for your admission.

  • Bones

    Lol……Moses was the absolute ruler of Ancient Israel ie a dictator.

  • Bones

    Hmmmm definitions….

    private school private school
    noun

    A secondary or elementary school run and supported by private individuals or a corporation rather than by a government or public agency.

    THE AMERICAN HERITAGE® DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE, FIFTH EDITION by the Editors of the American Heritage Dictionaries. Copyright © 2016, 2011 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.

    Or the international definition by OECD and PISA

    Q2 Is your school a public or a private school?
    (Please tick only one box)
    A public school
    (This is a school managed directly or indirectly by a public education authority, government agency, or
    governing board appointed by government or elected by public franchise.)
    1
    A private school
    (This is a school managed directly or indirectly by a non-government organisation; e.g. a church, trade union,
    business, or other private institution.)
    2

  • Bones

    Lol…..

    You’ve been caught out lying again.

    The writer’s response, “Yes, that’s the point: anyone can manipulate the presentation of data with multiple axes to present conclusions that one wants to draw, as Coulson did.”

    No wonder you like the Cato Institute of Fake News and bs.

  • Bones

    Yes I’ve admitted your deceitfulness and use of false representation to skew data to make it say what you want.

    Hard to believe that you could be studying any tertiary level maths at all.

  • Bones

    So what?

    You do.

    Thats what counts.

    You arent deflecting this off you sunshine.

    YOU’RE the one who is advocating living under a dictatorship which dispossessed the people around it.

    Hypocrite.

  • Bones

    Seems to be both….with a dose of Nazi lebensraum thrown in there….

    You know like Hitler invaded Russia because they were evil.

    Apparently he wants to live under a dictator ala Iran because he’s a libertaran.

  • Bones

    Maybe Cato should put his on their graph….

    “When we look at fourth and eighth grade scores, there are dramatic gains in performance over the last three decades. Within a socioeconomic group, the median student would typically fall between the 63rd and 85th percentile in the halcyon days of yore. That seems like a significant gain to me.”

    They won’t because they’re too dishonest peddling their bs graphs to idiots like you.

    https://mikethemadbiologist.com/2014/10/08/about-that-cato-institute-education-chart/

  • Ron McPherson

    Google this:
    “Do private schools receive government funding.”

    And this is the first thing that pops up:
    “Private schools are ALMOST fully funded by tuition fees paid by students’ parents, but they DO receive some GOVERNMENT subsidies.”

    For the third time, you are misunderstanding what your own pic is saying. You’re confused on the meaning of the words “supported” and “rather.”

    Google the word “support” and the very first thing that pops up is this:

    “bear all or PART of the weight”

    Per the image you keep posting, I’ll try (probably in vain) to make this as simple for you as I can:

    “Private school: A School supported (which is borne by all or in part) by a private organization or private individuals rather than a government.”

    The word “rather” underscores the distinction between a private school and a public one, a public school being defined as (per Google, it’s literally the first thing that pops up) “a school supported (which is borne by all or in part) by public funds”.

    Since you’ve already acknowledged that a public school can indeed receive dollars other than from public funds (eg user fees from private individuals), are you now going to claim that it ceases to be public school once that happens?

    In your mind, a private school ceases to be private when a small portion of its dollars comes from public revenue, but yet a public school does not cease to be public in your mind when a small portion of its dollars comes from private revenue? Your inconsistency here makes no sense.

  • Bones

    Oh dear….

    How dishonest are the Cato Institute…….

    Cato Institute Helpfully Makes Its Fake Climate Report Look Like Actual Government Climate Report, Except Fake

    Read more at https://wonkette.com/487796/cato-institute-helpfully-makes-its-fake-climate-report-look-like-actual-government-climate-report-except-fake#2VdieqQADvyYJ1I7.99

    No wonder you love em…..

  • Bones

    He needs to find another dishonest graph from an organisation which specialises in spreading lies.

  • Ron McPherson

    Definitely

  • Bones
  • Bones

    About That Cato Institute Education Chart

    Ugh. Even if you take twelfth grade scores seriously–we’ll return to that in a bit–this misrepresents the case. Using the Long-Term Trend Data, if break out the mathematics data by parental educational status and race, we see a different picture (the picture is similar for reading). Scores for white students essentially are unchanged (in reading, they drop; my fellow honkeysoids, what’s going on?). But for black students, they typically increase around half a standard deviation, meaning that a student today would be at about the seventieth percentile in 1978. That’s not nothing. Hispanics move to around the sixty-fifth percentile give or take.

    But here’s the thing: we probably shouldn’t take the twelfth grade data very seriously. The NAEP has always realized that high school seniors at that point know the test doesn’t mean anything, and they don’t take it very seriously (‘ridiculous’ answers such as blank pages, or all A’s are much higher). When we look at fourth and eighth grade scores, there are dramatic gains in performance over the last three decades. Within a socioeconomic group, the median student would typically fall between the 63rd and 85th percentile in the halcyon days of yore. That seems like a significant gain to me.

    Of course, there are subtexts to this debate revolving around school funding (CUT ALL TEH BUJJITZ!!!), but the picture isn’t as bad as Cato paints it.

    https://mikethemadbiologist.com/2014/10/08/about-that-cato-institute-education-chart/

    Oh and the coup-de-grace

    “Are they looking only at inflation-adjusted dollars for pay? Have they never heard of Baumol’s cost disease? Teachers are people who are smart enough and go to school long enough that they could have chosen some other profession if teaching had looked unattractive enough — if their pay does not keep pace with those alternatives, we’ll end up with fewer teachers or less-skilled teachers. Cato can whinge all they want about their mythical productivity measures not keeping pace with pay, but That Is F***ing Irrelevant. Baumol’s Cost Disease, tough shit, you’ll pay the wages or settle for less.

    Morons. As if I expected anything else from Cato.”

  • Bones
  • Matthew

    This is hilarious Bones :-) :-)! I can´t wait to see his “counter-punch” graph :-).

  • $144948586

    “The NAEP has always realized that high school seniors at that point know the test doesn’t mean anything, and they don’t take it very seriously (‘ridiculous’ answers such as blank pages, or all A’s are much higher).”
    I appreciate the admission that at least one year of school is a waste of time and money.

  • $144948586

    I find this pretty funny, so ill give you an upvote; non-Christ-like slander aside.

  • $144948586

    What do you care? You don’t believe slavery is wrong.

  • Bones

    Can you really post anything without lying?

  • Bones

    It doesnt take a year to fill out a test, derpie.

    Especially when it means nothing to the one doing it.

    No wonder you read Cato’s bs.

  • Bones

    And pretty accurate…..

    Lol the king of non-christlike slander accusing others is pretty funny.

  • $144948586

    Are there such things as natural rights?

  • IconoclastTwo

    Why is about 80% of this discussion about Josh when Josh has no intention of ever changing his mind and the entire central points that he seems to have are wholly diversionary to this topic in the first place?

  • Ron McPherson

    Yeah, seems really strange for a person to call out non-Christ-like behavior when he equates my former employees to mobsters and extortionists for the crime of working their a$$es off to ensure 8000 people received their paycheck that month.

  • $144948586

    “No wonder you read Cato’s bs.”
    At least I’m not pulling “science” off a WordPress blog. Pathetic.

  • Bones

    Lol….someone’s upset that their bs has been found out.

    And you thought you were really clever.

  • $144948586

    Hi Bones, I had to dig a bit. But, finally, I found it.
    Was it not you who said,
    There are no ‘natural rights’ in the animal kingdom?

    I rest my case; Bones does not believe slavery is wrong.

  • Bones

    Lol…..no there aren’t natural rights in the animal kingdom. Animals eat each other. And we eat them.

    And if you look at the history of humanity, there were no natural rights for thousands of years.

    The US constitution lists life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as natural rights while owning slaves and killing Indians.

    We however have rights that have evolved with time and social development into what we call human rights.

    That’s why we say slavery is wrong.

    Not really too bright are you.

  • Bones

    I find it bizarre that people hang around blogs they fundamentally disagree with.

    I can only assume it is some form of trolling or attention seeking.

  • $144948586

    “We however have rights that have evolved with time and social development into what we call human rights.”
    Great, so since Society hadn’t determined that slavery was wrong at this point, then it would be a lie for you to call it wrong. By your own definition of where rights come from, neither child slavery during this time nor slavery on the plantation we’re wrong, because Society had not developed to the point of calling it wrong.
    In fact though, if Society is what dictates what’s wrong or right, then you can’t call killing the Jews wrong and you can’t call going back to slavery wrong if that’s what Society wants to do. So again I say, what do you care? You don’t believe that slavery was wrong anyway.

  • Bones

    Still trying to save face I see after being exposed as a dishonest merkin….

    I’d want to change the subject as well.

    Well western society only recently GAVE rights to gay people…..something which people like you fought against and keep fighting over.

    Rights as such are based on law.

    Do you even understand why we have laws?

    Laws are primarily; to regulate society; to protect people; to enforce rights and to solve conflicts. Laws prevent or deter people from behaving in a manner that negatively affects the quality of life of other people, therefore the consequences of breaking the law often fit the crime.

    Do you even understand where laws come from?

    Laws come from government (whatever form that is).

    Democratic governments elect governments which govern and administer laws according to the will of the people (eg Trump and abortion). And yes that can be manipulated eg errr Trump….So when Hitlers are ELECTED into power it is ultimately the responsibility (and reflects the values) of those who voted them in.

    So why is gassing Jews, burning people alive, raping and committing genocide, killing gay people and keeping slaves wrong?

    Because it violates every principle of human rights which those societies forsook or didn’t acknowledge.

    Principles which we acknowledge today. And which we must defend from those who wish to diminish those rights.

    So yeah I can judge other societies eg Saudi Arabia and say they are evil.

    Which is interesting because your yearning for the Old Testament Judges would bring us back to a society like Saudi Arabia – ruled by theocrats, applying laws based on religion – not on people or rights.

    To them and the Hitlers and slave owners and Empire builders, human life meant nothing. And yet many Christians (which you have yourself have done) defend the Old Testament and the genocidal (and fictional) accounts of the Canaanite Conquest. In the same way many defend slavery, the conquest of the Indigenous Americans……

    Your argument’s frankly ridiculous…..

  • Ron McPherson

    By pressing this matter, Josh doesn’t realize he’s actually weakening his own arguments for anarchy lol.

  • $144948586

    “Because it violates every principle of human rights which those societies forsook or didn’t acknowledge.”
    How could they forsake such rights when rights are determined by society and thus don’t transcend society?

    As you say, “Rights as such are based on law…Laws come from government (whatever form that is).”

    Their government deemed Jews should be killed, so, per you,Jews had the right to die.

  • Al Cruise

    I agree, he is definitely a troll , they usually come on sites that are successful with a large following and influence, they become motivated by jealousy knowing they don’t have the same abilities to create their own blog that would have any kind of equal success. Their arguments rely solely on the use of reiteration of a shallow viewpoint void of any critical thinking . The dead give away is when they are challenged they immediately cry like a little baby ” you’re not very Christlike “.

  • Matthew

    I don´t mind that they come really. What bothers me the most is that very often they
    do not know how to have a civil conversation which values listening over speaking …

  • Bones

    It’s called social movements and education which normally starts as discontent and grows (eg Magna Carta, American Revolution).

    Do you think we stopped burning people at the stake for fun and not as a product of say…..the Enlightenment?

    As I said the Nazi government (which you are fond of using) were elected by people and they bear responsibility for that. Of course the Nazis were a product of thousands of years of anti-semitism propagated by Christianity.

    Once again rights are based on law.

    YOu actually wish to go back to a model of government like Saudi Arabia where clerics and religion are the basis of law – not rights.

  • Bones

    Well I’ve never heard of an anarchist proposing we have an Old Testament (theo-dictatorial) style of government…..

    Maybe he’s just realised that anarchy = no rights.

  • $144948586

    “It’s called social movements and education which normally starts as discontent and grows (eg Magna Carta, American Revolution).”
    I get your argument: social movements led to knew governments.

    Yet, your argument is also that “Rights as such are based on law…Laws come from government (whatever form that is).”

    Yet, you live under Australia 2018 rights. Hebrews lived under Judaism 2000 BC, and the U.S. during plantation period lived under USA 1800 government. Therefore it is inappropriate (and immoral, based on your definition) to suggest that what Israel did or what the US did was wrong.

    As you’ve stated, “Rights as such are based on law…Laws come from government (whatever form that is).”
    The Caananites didn’t have the right to not die (according to Judaism), and slaves didn’t have the right to not be subject to others, according to to your definition.
    To suggest otherwise, and to judge it as wrong 4000 years later is to suggest that the rights you have today transcend government.

    So either, you believe:
    1. Canaanite Genocide, American Slavery, and Germany killing Jews are wrong, because rights are applicable to times past and thus transcend government, therefore are not based on law. Or,
    2. “Rights as such are based on law…Laws come from government (whatever form that is),” and thus Canaanite Genocide, American Slavery, and Germany killing Jews are not wrong, because their governments are not of the same form as yours.

    In either case, you’re a liar, either in proposition or in moral judgment. You can’t believe both.

  • Bones

    Lol more lies from the Liar- in-chief….

    “Yet, you live under Australia 2018 rights. Hebrews lived under Judaism 2000 BC, and the U.S. during plantation period lived under USA 1800 government. Therefore it is inappropriate (and immoral, based on your definition) to suggest that what Israel did or what the US did was wrong.”

    Oh dear. I live in a modern western society based on human rights. Of course I can say that Saudi Arabia, Nazi Germany, 1800s US and Ancient Israel are wrong.

    It’s actually you who can’t.

    “The Caananites didn’t have the right to not die (according to Judaism), and slaves didn’t have the right to not be subject to others, according to to your definition.
    To suggest otherwise, and to judge it as wrong 4000 years later is to suggest that the rights you have today transcend government.

    So either, you believe:
    1. Canaanite Genocide, American Slavery, and Germany killing Jews are wrong, because rights are applicable to times past and thus transcend government, therefore are not based on law. Or,
    2. “Rights as such are based on law…Laws come from government (whatever form that is),” and thus Canaanite Genocide, American Slavery, and Germany killing Jews are not wrong, because their governments are not of the same form as yours.

    In either case, you’re a liar, either in proposition or in moral judgment. You can’t believe both.”

    And Jews were gassed, and Indians in your own country slaughtered. And Islamic countries have no concept of human rights. In fact they believe more like you do.

    These are all countries which are NOT based on human rights but on some form of exceptionalism and ruled by dictatorial and theocratic regimes.

    No wonder you like them.

    Human rights are administered by government and those that don’t advocate human rights are judged accordingly.

    It’s called progress.

    And learning from history.

    Of course we have to be on the alert for people like yourself who wish to deny human rights and go back to government by religion.

  • $144948586

    Fine Bones, live in your hell.
    It’s made clear that your beliefs are impossible to maintain. No wonder you’re depressed during Lent like the rest on this forum; you live in dishonesty.
    For real though, I hope your Easter was /is grand.

  • Bones

    I’m living in reality, dude, unlike yourself.

    Your beliefs are impossible to maintain unless you have some theocratic dictator to uphold them.

    Did we have Lent? I wouldn’t have noticed.

    And yeah Easter was pretty good.

  • $144948586

    “Your beliefs are impossible to maintain unless you have some theocratic dictator to uphold them.”
    It’s funny that I’m accused of needing a dictator to uphold that each person has the right to live as they see fit.

    You’re belief in government sounds an awful lot like what should be a belief in God; that is, we’re endowed by a creator with rights…government either honors them or does not, but that doesn’t mean you don’t have rights–it just means the government is wrong.

    Yet, you’re belief leads to the notion that government can never be wrong, because they define rights…that rights have no meaning until the government defines them.

    Your belief is hellish, because it’s logically inconsistent (as I showed above). Thus it’s untruth. It’s anti-Truth. It’s anti-Christ.

    “Did we have Lent? I wouldn’t have noticed.”
    Don’t have to be cheeky; of course you noticed.
    http://disq.us/p/1q7t6ux

    Life’s a lot easier when you recognize that you’re the oppressor, and you repent of it; it’s much easier, because it profoundly changes the understanding of Jesus has done. The greatest story ever told becomes the most glorious story ever told.

  • Bones

    “It’s funny that I’m accused of needing a dictator to uphold that each person has the right to live as they see fit.”

    Dur, that’s the Old Testament model which you want to live under. You know, Judges appointed by a theocratic dictator ergo Saudi Arabia and Iran.

    Go live there and see who’s living in hell.

    Actually my beliefs are informed by education and civil rights by which I judge other countries and eras.

    You can’t get that.

    It’s too difficult for you.

    That’s why Christ wouldn’t be crucified in the West today (religious conservatives would still hate him of course.)

    Different eras – different values – informed by education, progress, science………

    “Don’t have to be cheeky; of course you noticed.”
    No I didn’t.

    “Life’s a lot easier when you recognize that you’re the oppressor, and you repent of it; it’s much easier, because it profoundly changes the understanding of Jesus has done. The greatest story ever told becomes the most glorious story ever told.”

    Life’s a lot easier when you don’t have to lie or live a lie and recognise that you don’t have a clue whether you want to live under a theocratic dictatorship or anarchy. Maybe one day you’ll actually understand what the greatest story was about.

    Because you honestly don’t have a f***ing clue.

  • SamHamilton

    Good question. But apparently Josh and his interlocutors enjoy it.

    Happy Easter! “He is risen, He is risen, tell it out with joyful voice!”

  • $144948586

    “That’s why Christ wouldn’t be crucified in the West today (religious conservatives would still hate him of course.)”
    Oh yes he would; the nature of man hasn’t changed (of course you don’t believe that, because you believe the nature of man is defined by government).

    “Different eras – different values”
    Precisely, and since you believe your values are determined by government, you have no right to judge how Israel lived or what Hitler did to Jews–they didn’t live under your government.

    “Maybe one day you’ll actually understand what the greatest story was about.”
    You mean like:
    “Then someone called from the crowd, ‘Teacher, please tell my brother to divide our father’s estate with me.’
    Jesus replied, ‘Friend, who made me a judge over you to decide such things as that?’
    Then he said, ‘Beware! Guard against every kind of greed. Life is not measured by how much you own.'”

  • $144948586

    You find it bizarre that Jesus intercepted into sinful humanity?

  • $144948586

    “What bothers me the most is that very often they
    do not know how to have a civil conversation which values listening over speaking …”
    Careful Matthew, I’ve been nothing but cordial with you…and I’m far from having spread the level of vitriol as the person to whom you’ve responded.

  • $144948586

    “The dead give away is when they are challenged they immediately cry like a little baby ” you’re not very Christlike “.”
    I just, I just,
    http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/754/388/420.png

  • $144948586

    Why would they be left out?

  • Al Cruise

    You are who you are. By choice.

  • $144948586

    Not according to Bones; according to him, government defines who I am: government decides my worth; government decides if I have the right to live or be gassed in a chamber.

  • Bones

    Are you Jesus?

  • Bones
  • Bones

    …..

  • Ron McPherson

    Um, maybe because most parents of special needs kids don’t have $25k laying around their house each year?

  • $144948586

    You spoke in generality; the case of Jesus is enough to prove the point: you’d rather Jesus not have hung around folks he fundamentally disagreed with…even if he was Truth.

    Suffice it to say no, I’m not. But I point to the Truth. You, however, point to goverment.

  • $144948586

    Who says it would cost that much?

  • $144948586

    I rest my case.

  • $144948586

    Again, I rest my case.

  • Al Cruise

    Why don’t start your own blog with your own views and see how many followers you get ? Or maybe Brietbart News might hire you.

  • Ron McPherson

    Since you feel costs in the public education industry are inflated and can be fixed by merely injecting a good dose of capitalism into it, as the hypothetical owner of a private school, suppose a parent of a special needs child comes to you wanting to enroll their child. It becomes apparent quickly that the child requires their own teacher, a nurse, a specially designed bus with a chair lift, a special needs wheel chair once the child is at the school, and contracting a private firm to administer occupational, speech, and physical therapy services to the child. The cost to do all this would be well over $100k. As the owner of the school, you would of course build in a profit margin on top of this as well.

    So you have a couple of options here. You could pass the costs onto the rest of the school population (ie raise tuition costs for the parents of regular education children), though I assume you would reject that idea as it would be akin to forced taxation. Of course, the other parents have a right to leave and go to the school down the street who has no special needs kids. But if they leave in mass, you would be out of business.

    The other option you would have is simply passing on all the costs to the parents of the special needs child. But since the parents earn a combined salary less than what it would cost to educate their child, this is obviously not a viable option for them.

    The other option you would have is to allow the child to attend your school at say a 90% discount. But seeing it would not be a viable option for you to pay $90k out of your own pocket, this really isn’t a possibility.

    Of course, the final option is for you to simply tell the parents you can’t help them, which is what all the the other private schools have told them. The return on investment isn’t there for obvious reasons.

    So, the parents are outta luck. By the way,
    this is why we didn’t see capitalism running to these parents rescue before the government stepped in.

  • $144948586

    Because I was sent to the lost sheep of Patheos.

  • seashell

    You never had a case in the first place, never mind resting it.

  • Bones

    Jesus didn’t hang around the people he fundamentally disagreed with.

    They killed him remember?

    Once again you show you have no f***ing clue about anything.

    What do you think you’re trying to achieve here apart from trolling?

  • Bones

    Lol……..

    Sent to lie and post fake news…..

    Good work, champ.

  • Bones

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/51de43085e1f760968c6c301308cb9b2b828678da0107bca897c31dfb6e317de.jpg Seeing you like graphs……

    Here’s one more relevant than anything you’ve posted….

  • $144948586

    “Jesus didn’t hang around the people he fundamentally disagreed with.”
    Jesus = not sinner.
    Sinner = sinner.
    I can see why the comparison is hard.

  • $144948586

    First, don’t assume as though this problem has necessarily been solved at all schools throughout the country. If it had, there wouldn’t be medical-based tuition tax deduction which makes it cheaper for such a parent to homeschool such a child.
    Second, don’t forget that, according to the NEA–I’ve posted this to you before–some 80+% of all special education kids are just for ESL. Of total education, only some 13% is due to special education and thus results in quite a small overall increase in tuition costs…and this could be brought down when we consider that ESL students would probably thrive much better in a school that taught in similar fashion to schools in Europe in which English is learned as a second language while the primary education is taught in their first language….and it’s economically inefficient to have a school straddle both fences….as per the LRAC curve I’ve posted earlier.
    Third is this student the only child in the metroplex that needs a medically appropriated van? If not, then I’m sure there are savings in outsourcing the supply of that van to one used within the area to transport such kids. To buy one outright would be economically inefficient and unnecessary if it could be shared among districts (which, btw, could be owned by the same parent company).

  • Al Cruise

    Just what I expected, typical holier than thou , right wing fundie answer. I would say you lack confidence in your abilities, and know you would be a failure at it. Come on Josh put up a screed, I am sure you will get lots of likes from the likes from the white supremacists/KKK, alt-righters , young earthers, red moon watchers, end timers, and snake dancers.

  • $144948586

    If my followers were a fraction of how slanderous, authoritarian and overtly fascistic as those on here, I’d actually blog about the need for peaceful discussion and that love rises above and doesn’t first spring for derision….for the most part, Ron is the only one who generally tries such a thing.
    Oh and Matthew

    For the record, I’ve not made a claim to being holier than thou; I’m aware of my sinfulness and my need for a savior.
    I’ve also not been the one spewing vitriol and condescension to honest, peaceable inquisitors.
    But I do know what fascism looks like, and I find it imperative that those here understand that in government they trust and in democracy they oppress.
    Would you like for me to leave?

  • Ron McPherson

    A lift for under $5k can sometimes be fitted on an existing bus. That’s not where most of the costs go for this one student in our scenario. So we’re still looking at over $100k. Plus, this particular scenario has nothing to do with ESL. I’m giving you what could be a real life scenario. It doesn’t matter to these parents what the % of SPED/ESL population is.

    People are not statistics Josh. You seem to be oblivious that your capitalism model could leave people out. I gave you a scenario. Again, what will you tell these parents with respect to allowing them into your school? If capitalism is such a great fix for everyone, tell us how your school will provide these services to these parents and at what cost.

  • Matthew

    Don´t think I was specifically talking about you, just trolls in general.

  • $144948586

    It matters not; the op was about me and at best your comment was inappropriately placed.

  • $144948586
  • Al Cruise

    ” being holier than thou” Yes you are , very much so . I’ve dealt with your ilk for over forty years, and you’re all the same in the end when it comes to the fruit you eventually produce. The statement “Because I was sent to the lost sheep of Patheos.” Tells me everything.

  • Matthew

    Maybe so … thanks for being so cordial to me at least :-)

  • Matthew

    Do you like to listen, Josh?

  • $144948586

    All day everyday; I’m a frequenter of the This is Hell podcast which is literally hell for me. Why do you ask?

  • $144948586

    “you’re all the same in the end when it comes to the fruit you eventually produce.”
    I guarantee you this is not so.
    http://weknowmemes.com/generator/uploads/generated/g138983487414086275.jpg

    I’ll tell you what; I’ll be ready to bust up your arguments again.
    Just like I did in this link where you refuse to forgive Southern Baptists and accuse educators in schools and people in churches of being white supremacist as if its some epidemic and, yet, when pressed for names you refuse.

  • $144948586

    “You seem to be oblivious that your capitalism model could leave people out.”
    This isn’t true; I simply believe that capitalism (which isn’t a model, btw) minimizes the need of those receiving charity while maximizing the wealth of those who are able and thus maximizes the wealth (and the willingness to give freely) to those unable.
    In the case of taxing for education, the problem is that you eat away the wealth of people who would otherwise be interested in creating jobs by wanting to open their own businesses/invest for other business ventures and further reduce the need for charity. The other problem is that, this is exactly what future industries need. So when you tax, you punish workers and the wealth from which taxes come of the future–thus punishing kids in the future as schools are forced to face budget cuts since the economy is not performing as planned due to job mismatch with skills provided by public schools uninformed of industry needs and certain jobs no longer being available because of tax/welfare policy (like minimum wage) from 10, 20, 30 years ago.

    “Plus, this particular scenario has nothing to do with ESL.”
    It cannot be isolated without first acknowledging that the primary driver of increased special needs is due to children who are, for the most part, taught wholly inadequately for their well being.

    The children who need intensive care like your case are the exception to the rule.

    “Again, what will you tell these parents with respect to allowing them into your school?”
    The answer depends upon specifics. Are there other kids in the community or are they the sole isolated case?
    Why can’t the teacher/nurse be one person? Why can’t the teacher-nurse “administer occupational, speech, and physical therapy services to the child.”

    Here’s another question:
    Why do “the parents earn a combined salary less than what it would cost to educate their child”
    Most of the time the parent is able to take care of the child without nursing assistance; in fact, that’s primarily what we have now even in the most extreme cases: Medicaid covers nursing up to a certain period as does insurance but certainly not 365 care.

    And to your last point:
    “So, the parents are outta luck. By the way, this is why we didn’t see capitalism running to these parents rescue before the government stepped in.”
    Actually, it was capitalism that opened up children to being able to leave farms and go to factories AND THEN to go to school.
    Long before government intervention, capitalism was weaning children out of the labor force and in to education. In the U.S., by the time the government got around to banning child labor, it was only around 6.4% of children working and 75+% of those were on farms.
    https://mises.org/library/trouble-child-labor-laws

    A direct result of capitalism; in fact the only children really getting hurt in all this were those forced to get off farms–though, the law was careful to allow that exception.
    https://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs40.htm

  • Al Cruise

    More Holier than thou evidence. Josh you are a white supremacist the most sneaky kind out out there.

  • $144948586

    “the most sneaky kind out out there.”
    I thought you just said we’re all the same.

    For the record, I’ve made no reference to one’s race.

  • Ron McPherson

    “Why can’t the teacher/nurse be one person? Why can’t the teacher-nurse “administer occupational, speech, and physical therapy services to the child.”

    You’re kidding right? Teacher, nurse, therapist all rolled into one. Three distinct certifications requiring three distinct career paths, three distinct types of professional training, and three distinct professions. Combined into one individual. Superman! This seriously shows you have a profound lack of understanding in this area. I’m not trying to be a butt here, but I don’t even know where to begin.

    “Are there other kids in the community or are they the sole isolated case?”

    And again, you’re showing a basic lack of understanding here. Special needs children, especially like the scenario I presented, have an individual education plan. There are needs distinct to the specific child, advancing at different speeds, at profoundly different skills and education levels.

    At this point I give up.

  • $144948586

    “Teacher, nurse, therapist all rolled into one.”
    That’s absurd? Parents perform these roles all their lives.

    “Three distinct certifications requiring three distinct career paths, three distinct types of professional training, and three distinct professions.”
    And yet parents almost always produce home-schooled children who outperform their grade school contemporaries.
    And yet parents are almost always the primary caretakers of their physically challenged children.
    And yet parents are almost always the primary therapists of their physically challenged children.
    If a parent could do it, why could we not expect not-a-parent to do it, particularly if they have years of experience?

    “Special needs children, especially like the scenario I presented, have an individual education plan.”
    I would say this may be; thus the solution to the cost problem associated with it is to not let them waste their abilities on a school wholly inadequate to solve it.

    Though they need an individual education plan, it’s not like a single nurse couldn’t care for multiple children at a time. If a child needs full time nurse care at every second, then even the idea of transporting them would be a danger to their health.

    Costs are reduced by reaching economies of scale; you admit this. Thus it’s important, can a better economy of scale be reached? I would bet so if there is more than one in an area–is there only one or are there several?

  • Ron McPherson

    Ok Josh. Obviously you have all the answers.

  • $144948586

    No I just believe things could be better

  • Ron McPherson

    I believe a lot of things can be better. That’s not been the issue

  • $144948586
  • Bones
  • Bones

    Jesus didn’t hang around conservatives, they killed him.

    I can see why the comparison is hard.

  • Ron McPherson

    How many minutes have you spent observing what occurs between a severely disabled student (like the scenario I gave you) and their teacher in a comprehensive classroom development setting? It stretches the bounds of incredulity that you’re still minimizing the cost and scope of services provided to these children in such an educational setting. And frankly, it is offensive to anyone who knows better.

    In your zealous hatred of all things govt, including public education, you’ve either ignorantly or purposely turned a blind eye to certain realities in the hopes of trying to win a debate, ultimately minimizing the significance of what is provided to these children at a public school setting.

    For at least the umpteenth time, special needs children are not widgets that can be economized to dilute costs. You can’t just assemble 30 SPED kids requiring CDC services and throw them all into a single classroom such that a single teacher can meet their needs. We’re not talking a 6th grade math class here. Each child has their own individual IEP.

    A school in my district had to hire 4 separate educational assistants for, now get this, 4 separate students. There was no choice. A private school would have turned these kids away. Period. Case closed. The students have SEVERE needs. Each assistant costs $20k. That doesn’t count the equipment and other services provided. This is reality. Has not one d*mn thing to do with charts, graphs, economies of scale, % of ESL students. It’s just freakin real life.

  • $144948586

    “It stretches the bounds of incredulity that you’re still minimizing the

    cost and scope of services provided to these children in such an
    educational setting. And frankly, it is offensive to anyone who knows
    better.”
    I’ve not “minimized the cost and scope of services”; I’ve argued that the cost could be brought down by economies of scale that AREN’T being reached.
    What’s offensive is to keep expecting tax payer to subsidize the inefficiency of the school system whose cost per student has increased 200% since the 1970’s in real terms. It’s incredibly naive to think that it is sustainable as if taxing an economy doesn’t destroy the very hand that feeds it–and it’s incredibly naive or insidious if you do know better to believe that the solution to the diseconomy of scale of the public school system should just have more money thrown at it….IT IS UNSUSTAINABLE, Herm–and the result will be another episode of Soviet Russia’s demise: a bunch of future generations suffer because an older generation believed that their way was right.

    “In your zealous hatred of all things govt, including public education,
    you’ve either ignorantly or purposely turned a blind eye to certain
    realities in the hopes of trying to win a debate, ultimately minimizing
    the significance of what is provided to these children at a public
    school setting.”
    Nonsense; to ignore reality is to believe the solution to a diseconomy of scale is to give it more money without seeking any reform….I mean it’s had 4 decades to fix the problem; what’s it waiting on?

    “special needs children are not widgets that can be economized to dilute costs.”
    Neither are taxpayers who are just trying to do right by their own families and yet must be forced to work 3 months of a year free for government–but taxing them is no moral conundrum for you, though it’s equivalent to slavery..

    “There was no choice. A private school would have turned these kids away. Period. Case closed. The students have SEVERE needs. Each assistant costs $20k. That doesn’t count the equipment and other services provided. This is reality.”
    Again, in a school wholly inadequate to care for the such needs.

    “It’s just freakin real life.”
    Real life isn’t ignoring the reality of unsustainability; it’s merely procrastination to the detriment of future generations.
    This is why Seattle and California solve the issues facing their communities by believing tax payers are merely pawns, but all they did was destroy their local economies by forcing businesses to go elsewhere.
    You choose easy solutions: enslave others through taxation. It just isn’t a solution, as demonstrated by the graph:
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3e99e190e60e3f28cf0dd114da79190519e1a17226aab1dd2eb475d30e796bc0.png

    Instead, it’s a temporary patch on a growing problem that eventually WILL have a reckoning; will you care? Doubtful; you’ll probably just blame it on free market subterfuge.

  • Matthew

    Josh said:

    “This isn’t true; I simply believe that capitalism (which isn’t a model,
    btw) minimizes the need of those receiving charity while maximizing the
    wealth of those who are able and thus maximizes the wealth (and the
    willingness to give freely) to those unable.”

    This is where I have problems with the libertarian/free market/no taxation idea. It assumes that wealth will trickle down to those unable to compete in such a system from people who are wealthy. Has this ever really happened on a large scale?

    “Just for fun he says … get a job … and that´s just the way it is …”

  • Ron McPherson

    You’re operating from a presumption that no govt agencies seek to minimize costs and that their solution is to always demand more funding thru taxation. And I’m telling you, after working in the public sector for over two decades and wrestling with budgets, that you’re wrong. We HAD to operate within budgetary constraints. The govt can’t just arbitrarily demand more of your money without the legislative body, elected by the citizenry, passing a tax increase. I’ve lived the process for over two decades. I know what was spent. I know what was received, and I know the pressure applied to budgets in light of the scope of services demanded by the citizenry, all while trying to stretch a dollar to make it work.

    You seem to have created a caricature of govt in your own mind as if it is some form of evil. By the way, your 200% increase number we’ve already established resulted in the cost of education going up on average a dollar a day for each child over those years. I know you still hate that principle though.

    Look at educational services 40 years ago, comparing to the services provided today and it’s demands, and maybe that will help you understand why additional services can’t be performed for free.

  • Ron McPherson

    Actually it’s not. Fundamentally, with you at least, your whole point is that a for-profit school system can make the education industry more efficient, more effective, can provide all the same services, leave no one behind, and can do all this cheaper than a nonprofit governmental agency. And I’m calling BS on it.

  • $144948586

    “You’re operating from a presumption that no govt agencies seek to minimize costs and that their solution is to always demand more funding thru taxation. ”
    No, I’m arguing that government agencies always fail to minimize costs–I don’t doubt kindhearted people work in the agencies and try to save money–a person such as my frugal wife would do so (she doesn’t work for govt by the way).
    But, the vast majority of institutions with allocated budgets end up using up budgets for fear that they will be cut.

    “And I’m telling you, after working in the public sector for over two decades and wrestling with budgets, that you’re wrong. We HAD to operate within budgetary constraints.”
    And yet I guarantee 99.9999% of the time you hit the constraints because “they weren’t high enough”. I know this because I have friends who receive federal funding in their enterprises…they end up buying needless computers/monitors that go in to closet storage because they’re securing their funding in the next yer.

    “You seem to have created a caricature of govt in your own mind as if it is some form of evil.”
    It’s based on compromise, violence, and the usurpation of one’s will over another: that is evil.

    “The govt can’t just arbitrarily demand more of your money without the legislative body”
    I’ve heard this same argument about going to war; besides, regardless of a legislative body, the implication of property taxes is that you really don’t own anythng: you merely rent it from government at prices that the government sets–and, for the record, if they want more of your tax money they don’t have to increase tax rates. They just have to reappraise your house, which many municipalities are doing because, surprise, they fail at minimizing costs.

    “By the way, your 200% increase number we’ve already established resulted in the cost of education going up on average a dollar a day for each child over those years.”
    Ron, as a financial manager you should understand this is ambiguous. What went up? What were the biggest cost drivers? The necessity demands of the average student hasn’t increased. There’s been no fundamental change to humanity that prevents mathematics, science or reading from being leaned via traditional methods.

    “Look at educational services 40 years ago, comparing to the services provided today and it’s demands”
    I’m looking; I don’t see anything much better (as per the graph showing cost to test scores) except that they’ve removed textbooks from many classes and overwork kids and drive up suicide rates and leave children with the feeling of “I just wish I wasn’t so tired.”
    http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-02-20/health/sc-health-0220-child-health-tired-20130220_1_chronic-fatigue-epstein-barr-virus-tiredness
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/10/23/survey-students-tired-stressed-bored/74412782/

  • $144948586

    “It assumes that wealth will trickle down to those unable to compete in such a system from people who are wealthy. Has this ever really happened on a large scale?”
    You don’t own a smart phone, a computer, a car, a home (if not, this is fair–the government has jacked up home prices), a refrigerator, a microwave, an air conditioner?

    You see, you wanna talk about wealth, but wealth is only created when you get people to buy your product(s).
    For Jeff Bezos, it started with books (really it started with investment banks buying his labor).
    For the majority of Americans, it starts with corporations buying their labor.

    It’s weird to think one just “deserves wealth”. You also ignore that well being isn’t about “wealth”. It’s about “wealth” as compared to prices of goods….and I bet you own the vast majority of those things, all the result of FREER markets and not the product of government. You see, wealth is not money in the bank–it’s money one has/can attain RELATIVE to what they can buy–and as a Westerner, you can buy a whole hell of a lot.

    “Just for fun he says … get a job … and that´s just the way it is …”
    Don’t put words in my mouth; I didn’t say this.

  • $144948586

    “Fundamentally, with you at least, your whole point is that a for-profit school system can make the education industry more efficient, more effective, can provide all the same services, ”
    Damn straight.

    “leave no one behind”
    Did not say this.

    “can do all this cheaper than a nonprofit governmental agency”
    Damn straight.

    “And I’m calling BS on it.”
    Well according to that curve, if competition were allowed then someone would fill the profit void and bring down cost…we know where we are with the government–it only always gets worse.

  • Ron McPherson

    I’ll move on

  • Ron McPherson

    Whatever you say

  • Ron McPherson

    I don’t understand why you just don’t get out of the U.S. and move to somewhere like Hong Kong. Your answer to LGBT community is not to complain about the bigoted baker. Instead they can just go to the next county and find a baker there who will sell them a wedding cake. Same with black folks who are refused service in a Mississippi diner. Go to a capitalistic fry cook over in the next city and let the racist diner be racist without government intervention.

    Since your answer to these folks is to escape discrimination by simply going to another locale, what is stopping you from applying those same principles to yourself in escaping taxation? If you don’t like the existing tax base you’re under, then find an area in this country with a lesser one. If every square inch in the U.S. is over taxed, then relocate to somewhere like Cambodia. Their tax rate is low.

    In other words, folks who are discriminated against can escape to a more capitalist area according to you. Why can you not escape taxation by doing the same?

  • $144948586

    “Instead they can just go to the next county”
    First of all, nonsense; I’m sure there’s more than one baker within that county.

    Beyond that though, what’s wrong with going elsewhere if they desire it bad enough?

    “Same with black folks who are refused service in a Mississippi diner.”
    Kind of profiling for Mississippians, but I see your point and say, “So what?” Maybe I’ll start a diner that accepts them; their money spends just as well.
    Keep in mind, life wasn’t hard in the Jim Crow south because business didn’t serve blacks; life was hard because government instituted laws making it illegal to serve blacks.

    “Go to a capitalistic fry cook over in the next city and let the racist diner be racist without government intervention.”
    Absolutely.

    “what is stopping you from applying those same principles to yourself in escaping taxation?”
    Nothing, except “leaving fees” and the fact that I have much vested here—but just because I choose to be close to my family and friends I’ve grown up with and speak the language of doesn’t mean I am not willing to accept that their are certain oppressions I’m willing to live under while fighting against them. What’s wrong with that?

    “If you don’t like the existing tax base you’re under, then find an area in this country with a lesser one.”
    I’d love to, but then the jobs follow and then the liberals do and that’s why people are leaving California for Texas in droves.

    “If every square inch in the U.S. is over taxed, then relocate to somewhere like Cambodia.”
    You mean the country that socialist system called communism destroyed?

    “Why can you not escape taxation by doing the same?”
    I never said I couldn’t.

  • $144948586

    Btw, Ron. Just because I don’t “complain about the bigoted baker” doesn’t mean that I believe he’s wrong.
    I’d simply view it as a profit opportunity and maybe, just maybe, run that baker out of business–if I so wanted.

  • Bones
  • Bones

    Josh would love Saudi Arabia……

    They’ve just introduced their first tax – 5% on Goods and Services…..

    And he gets to be ruled by clerics which is what he wants…..

  • Ron McPherson

    It’s utterly ridiculous for him to claim that private ventures could somehow provide all educational services that public schools already do now, plus do it more efficiently, more effectively, and cheaper, all while simultaneously building in a profit margin to boot. Nothing is stopping private schools from doing it now. Spoiler alert: they’re not!

  • Matthew

    The quote was from a song that this discussion reminded me of … not a direct quote from you.

    Thanks for all the information Josh. I knew a guy in university who held pretty much these same views. I now remain unconvinced.

  • Ron McPherson

    “The quote was from a song that this discussion reminded me of”

    Josh must not be familiar with Bruce Hornsby lol

  • $144948586

    Well we’re not all cut from the same cloth; so I’d be cautious to say he’s a me.
    That being said, perhaps one day you can be convinced. Otherwise, i appreciate you being inquisitive.

  • Matthew

    Thanks.

    Yeah … like I said, I was very good friends with a guy in university who was a conservative Christian and also a strong libertarian/free market/no taxation kind of person. I too was a very conservative person for a long time — both fiscally and socially. I´ve converted over the years :-) in many ways.

    For me, Josh, I get that libertarianism is about real and true individual freedom minus what libertarians consider extortion at the state level. That said, until I can be completely convinced that a free individual with more wealth, money, resources, etc. will make benevolent decisions regarding those without such resources I will continue to also trust in some form of state system (the church must also do its part as well).

    [Edited]

  • $144948586

    “That said, until I can be completely convinced that a free individual with more wealth, money, resources, etc. will make benevolent decisions regarding those without such resources I will continue to also trust in some form of state system (the church must also do its part as well).”
    Just keep in mind that this presupposes that government will make (at least marginally) more benevolent decisions.

    But intention is hardly a measure of benevolence.
    After all, I could take all of a man’s fishes except what I think he needs and feed others; from the perspective of those I’ve fed I’m benevolent, but from the perspective of the one whose fishI took. But of course, what I’ve really done is taking the fisherman and disincentivized him from getting more fish that what he wants. As a result, fewer fish are caught and more people go hungry. And this, of course, is NOT benevolent.

  • $144948586

    You own a relatively inexpensive communication device that has more computing power than you’re early 2000’s computer; you’re welcome.
    Consumers didn’t think of that, producers did: Supply-side, ftw.

  • $144948586

    I dig the Tupac rendition, but otherwise no–except the Mandolin Rain song.

  • Matthew

    Always want the last word … right Josh :-) :-)

    Thanks for all the thoughts … but these dishes are done.

    Matthew

  • $144948586

    “Always want the last word … right Josh :-) :-)”
    Completely unwarranted; once again, I’ve been nothing but cordial with you.

    Your statement deserved to have the other side of that coin exposed to whomever is reading it. You believe it depends on a free individual being benevolent, but it’s important to note that you presuppose what the government is doing is benevolent.

  • Matthew

    :-)

  • Ron McPherson

    I’m too old. Didn’t even know about a Tupac version

  • Bones
  • Bones
  • Bones

    Josh wants to live in a system controlled by theocratic dictators.

  • Bones

    No, you didn’t.

  • Bones

    As opposed to corporations like Facebook…….

  • Ron McPherson

    “You believe it depends on a free individual being benevolent, but it’s important to note that you presuppose what the government is doing is benevolent“

    Depends on who you are. If you’re the parent of a severely disabled child that you want to be educated as best as possible, and to be able to experience life with other children and to be trained in life skills within a social setting, then the government is providing a benevolent function because the high cost of educating your child is shared amongst the citizenry at large.

    If on the other hand, you’re the parent of a straight A student in upscale suburbia who grew up without any disadvantages mentally, physically, or socially, and resent your dollars going for anything other than for your own child’s education, then the government may not seem so benevolent.

    Again, depends on perspective.

  • Matthew

    I gotta say Ron … where I live, although the bureaucracy can sometimes be annoying and tedious, I believe the government here is trying to be benevolent to its citizenry although it will never create a social justice utopia — this I know for the state is only a human mechanism/institution.

    That said, in the 12 years or so that I have lived here, I have never heard the kind of complaining about taxation and government control that goes on in the U.S. People pay high taxes here, but I think most of the population accepts that as necessary in order to provide the kind of services that a government typically does.

    Government does fail sometimes, and historically some governments have made disasterous decisions with inhumane consequences, but I don´t think we should throw the baby out with the bath water here. The state can make good decisions when its run by key decision makers who have the best interests of all their citizens in mind, although like I said it will never be perfect and mistakes will be made.

    [Edited]

  • Ron McPherson

    Well said. I suspect we complain a lot in America because we’re a very materialistic nation, even spoiled in many ways.

  • $144948586

    Nothing about economics in that graphic.

  • $144948586

    At this point, I know I’m going to sound unloving, because you midtake forced coercion with compassion, but I’m just going to finish it, if you’re willing to concede the point I’ll be happy to expound upon the finer details.

    Ron, did the man with the straight A student cause the handicap of the physically disabled?

  • $144948586

    Everyone had been warned about Facebook; it was in their terms of service for God’s sake.
    Don’t get me wrong, I dislike social media (I really dislike that they sell their information to governments) and will be foregoing Facebook in the coming year, but it’s the height of hypocrisy for people to be so up in arms that their information was gathered from a public platform which they voluntarily agreed to.
    Facebook never forced people to use their service.

  • Bones

    Oh dear, derpaderpaderpaderp knows nothing about educating young people about technology especially coding….

    That’s why most kids will know more than you.

  • Bones

    Lol….it’s always everyone else’s fault when corporations do bad things…..

    I’m pretty sure people didn’t sign up to have their data sold off to whoever wanted it.

  • $144948586

    “it’s always everyone else’s fault when corporations do bad things…..”
    Yes, it’s always everyone else’s fault when you allow others to use your property so long as you agreed to the terms and conditions of coming on that property….and at any moment, the terms and conditions were and are available for review.

    Why is that so ridiculous?

    “I’m pretty sure people didn’t sign up to have their data sold off to whoever wanted it.”
    Just because they didn’t read the contract doesn’t mean the person whose property they’re utilizing is immoral.
    Contractually, they agreed to have their information sold by signing up. I’m even pretty certain that when you sign up (it’s been like 10 years) you must check the box that says, “Yes, I agree to the terms of service.”

  • Ron McPherson

    Of course not

  • Bones

    Those terms and conditions are nothing about selling your private info…..

    Keep defending corporations you hypocritical nutter.

  • $144948586

    Then what responsibility does he have to subsidize the cost of the handicapped child?

  • Bones
  • $144948586

    “Those terms and conditions are nothing about selling your private info…..”
    You signed the terms and conditions which explicitly state they will collect it; what matter is it to you what they do with it? You should’ve objected to this before signing up. You’re on their property.

  • Ron McPherson

    “…you midtake forced coercion with compassion”

    By the way, I don’t mistake coercion with compassion at all. But compassion alone doesn’t pay the bills. So instead of forcing the parents to seek annual donations on their own in order to help them pay the educational cost for their child, I have no problem with helping those parents thru taxation of the populace. Just like I have no problem paying taxes to pave a road I never use across town. And those across town pay taxes such that my road they never use can be paved if the need arises next year.

  • $144948586

    “But compassion alone doesn’t pay the bills.”
    This is no justification for taking from others to pay those bills. Plus, it’s taken on faith and assumes those bills are necessary.

    “So instead of forcing the parents to seek annual donations on their own in order to help them pay the educational cost for their child”
    “On their own” is nonsense. Charities have existed for millenia.

    “I have no problem with helping those parents thru taxation of the populace.”
    Of course not, because you’re not helping; you’re dictating.

    “Just like I have no problem paying taxes to pave a road I never use across town.”
    And you can give to build that road if you’d like.

    “And those across town pay taxes such that my road they never use can be paved if the need arises next year.”
    And that’s dictation.

  • Bones

    Lol…from facebook

    Does Facebook sell my information?
    No, we don’t sell any of your information to anyone and we never will.

    You have control over how your information is shared. To learn more about the controls you have, visit Facebook Privacy Basics.

    So they lie as well.

  • $144948586

    “No, we don’t sell any of your information to anyone and we never will.”
    Exactly who is Facebook selling to, though?

  • Ron McPherson

    He lives in a country where taxation is imposed to benefit the citizenry at large. That’s kinda how it works here. He has the freedom to move to a country with lower taxation and that doesn’t give two sh*ts about handicapped children. That way he can be free to be a self-centered stingy a$$ without reason to complain

  • $144948586

    Ron, this presupposes that he voluntarily chose to exist in a country that taxes. But if taxation is for the purpose of helping other citizens, then again I ask: what responsibility does he have to subsidize the cost of the other citizenry?

  • Ron McPherson

    Where does it begin and end? Is it just the roads in my neighborhood that I should be expected to contribute to? In fact, why should I even have to pay for paving the portion in front of my next door neighbors home?

    I drive only on Elm to get to the local pharmacy. So that means I don’t have to pay for Maple because I don’t go that way. But what if a water main breaks and floods Elm. Now I can’t pick up my meds because I contributed nothing to Maple’s upkeep. Suddenly I want to go Maple. Who do I need to pay?

  • $144948586

    “Is it just the roads in my neighborhood that I should be expected to contribute to?”
    No; you shouldn’t be expected to contribute to things you don’t use–and this contribution comes through purchasing of the services of such things.

    “In fact, why should I even have to pay for paving the portion in front of my next door neighbors home?”
    You shouldn’t.

    “I drive only on Elm to get to the local pharmacy. So that means I don’t have to pay for Maple because I don’t go that way.”
    You got it.

    “But what if a water main breaks and floods Elm.”
    Then the company which built the water main had better be planning compensation (or at least worked it out with whomever owns the property which they’ve temporarily destroyed.

    “Now I can’t pick up my meds because I contributed nothing to Maple’s upkeep.”
    That’s non-sense; Maple’s owner would allow you use for a reasonable price.

    “Suddenly I want to go Maple. Who do I need to pay?”
    Whoever owns Maple.

  • Ron McPherson

    “Ron, this presupposes that he voluntarily chose to exist in a country that taxes”

    So? Doesn’t mean he can’t pull himself up by his bootstraps and make his life better by moving. That’s kinda how it is with the parent of the handicap child right? They didn’t “voluntarily” choose for their child to be severely handicapped. They just need to take some ownership for their own disadvantaged state and not blame their current conditions as impeding them from having a better life. Find a solution. See how that works?

    “…what responsibility does he have to subsidize the cost of the other citizenry?”

    If he doesn’t like the terms of taxation in this country, he is free to move. So he has no responsibility unless he chooses to live under the laws of this land.

  • Ron McPherson

    LOL!!

  • $144948586

    “Doesn’t mean he can’t pull himself up by his bootstraps and make his life better by moving.”
    You’re missing the point. It presupposes that the country has a legitimate right to tax.

    “They just need to take some ownership for their own disadvantaged state and not blame their current conditions as impeding them from having a better life.”
    No. Because the state is a collective of individuals exerting aggression which they have no right to do individually; the same can’t be said of the handicapped person.
    But yes, they both can blame their disadvantaged state on current conditions.
    The first is able to blame outside actors.
    The second is only able to blame nature; this, however, does not give them, their family, their friends or society the right to become an outside actor that taxes the first.

  • $144948586

    I don’t know what’s funny about this, but OK.

  • Ron McPherson

    “ It presupposes that the country has a legitimate right to tax.”

    And you’re presupposing that you have a legitimate right to live here in the first place. You’re not required to live in this country. While you had no choice to be born here, you have chosen to stay. That’s your decision and by virtue of your actions in doing so, you are agreeing to the laws of the land including taxation.

    You can b*tch and moan all you like about taxation, but country has every right to tax because of the consent of the governed.

  • $144948586

    “And you’re presupposing that you have a legitimate right to live here in the first place.”
    So are you; therefore, who of us has the right to determine whether or not the state has the right based on this argument?

    “You’re not required to live in this country.”
    Ron, my right to live in this country isn’t the issue. The issue is does this country have the legitimate claim to own my land.
    This argument presupposes that the country had the legitimate right to own the land.
    It also presupposes that it has the right to declare me a citizen without my consent (they made this proclamation at birth).

    “You can b*tch and moan all you like about taxation, but country has every right to tax because of the consent of the governed.”
    I didn’t give consent to be governed, Ron.

    Thought experiment: Suppose the mafia took over your neighborhood and said you either pay us $X a month or leave; would you now say that they are the legitimate owners of your land now? But yet, I guess I consented to be governed.

  • Ron McPherson

    “…who of us has the right to determine whether or not the state has the right based on this argument?”

    Neither one of us individually. But the majority of the governed determines it. If the majority wants change, then that’s what elections are for. This country is established not on what you alone want or I alone want. Nor is it a dictatorship. It’s a republic. Don’t like it? Then effect change through the electoral process.

    “ I didn’t give consent to be governed, Ron.”

    Well the courts might rule otherwise. The framers of the constitution instituted three branches of government, with the judiciary being one of them. So if you live on American soil, then you’re subject to its laws.

    “The issue is does this country have the legitimate claim to own my land.”

    For one thing, I doubt it does own your land, unless you live on government property. If you live on private property, then either you, or a landlord, or a bank owns it. You may owe property taxes, and by law you have to pay those, because you live on republic soil. If you want to go all the way back to rightful owners absent of government intervention however, then you may need to turn your land over to the rightful descendants of the Native Americans who originally lived on it. At that point you can seek restitution from whomever you bought it from because you may have been party to a cycle of purchasing stolen property over the last 4 centuries.

    “Suppose the mafia took over your neighborhood and said you either pay us $X a month or leave; would you now say that they are the legitimate owners of your land now?”

    Was the mafia established from the consent of the governed? Nope

  • $144948586

    “But the majority of the governed determines it.”
    As you said, “by the consent to be governed”, but I didn’t consent to be governed.

    “Well the courts might rule otherwise.”
    You mean the mafia courts?

    “So if you live on American soil, then you’re subject to its laws.”
    Tell that to the Natives.

    “I doubt it does own your land”
    What do you think property taxes are? Rents; if you don’t pay, “their” property is taken away from you…or rather you are moved off of it.

    “Was the mafia established from the consent of the governed?”
    Fair enough. So then, suppose the mafia buys 51% of the houses in your neighborhood and vote that the neighborhood must pay $X a month or leave. Are they now legitimate owners of your land?

    “then you may need to turn your land over to the rightful descendants of the Native Americans who originally lived on it.”
    If they can prove it was illegitimately taken, then it is rightfully theirs.

  • Ron McPherson

    There’s seriously no good reason for you and I to continue to waste both of our time going in circles. You believe the whole institution of government, including the taxation to aid handicapped children and feed hungry kids, is pure evil. I don’t. You believe people should have the right to discriminate against gays and minorities. I don’t. You believe that gun shop owners should be free from any government intervention with respect to the selling of firearms. I don’t. What’s the point of us continuing? At any rate, peace.

  • $144948586

    “You believe the whole institution of government, including the taxation to aid handicapped children and feed hungry kids, is pure evil.”
    No, I believe one has no right to take from another without permission and neither do you..
    You don’t believe it’s OK for me to take your time and labor away by making you work in my field. But that’s exactly what taxation is: free, involuntary labor.

    “You believe people should have the right to discriminate against gays and minorities.”
    No, I believe it’s a natural right to discriminate and so do you.
    That’s why the majority of men marry women and vice versa, families are allowed to leave drug and gang-ridden towns, and we only allow people we judge as friendly to enter our homes. Gays and minorities are just extensions of the basic motivation for these other things. I don’t, however, make the asinine claim that discrimination is the same as oppression. That is, for me to refuse my services to gays and minorities is right; it is not a right for me to prevent gays and minorities from getting services elsewhere.

    “You believe that gun shop owners should be free from any government intervention with respect to the selling of firearms.”
    No, I “believe that gun shop owners should be free from any government intervention with respect to the selling of firearms [anything that wasn’t ill-gotten].

    “What’s the point of us continuing?”
    I’m sure we’ll continue later; I would like an answer to my adjusted mafia question, if you’d be so kind.

  • Ron McPherson

    Yeah Josh, we all know where you stand. You called government evil and equated my former employees to mobsters. You believe a racist restaurant owner should be allowed to refuse selling a sandwich to a black kid, and to you that’s ok because the kid can get a sandwich somewhere else. And that’s total bullsh*t. I work with minorities who are still trying to overcome systemic racism experienced as children. They couldn’t go to the school in their neighborhood, or eat at the local diner. They had to go across town, to the segregated district. But that’s ok with you. Hey, they could go somewhere else right?

  • $144948586

    “They couldn’t go to the school in their neighborhood”
    You mean the public school? What year was this?

    “They had to go across town, to the segregated district.”
    Point made.

    “But that’s ok with you.”
    Ron, don’t deride me unfairly. As a Christian, that’s not OK. But, as a Christian, making someone who’d rather not serve them serve them anyway is not OK either. It’s enslavement for the sake of another person–neither of these are OK with me.

    BUT, I would own the diner across town and I’d be happy to take their money.

  • Bones

    And your type of thinking was what many whites thought for decades. The blacks can just go somewhere else.

    Because conservatives didn’t like black people….

    Heyy Ruby, just go to another school…..because Josh said….. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2db45a84600f8d3e74a54d74ca5db368e9a55eb560a7e852e321c9655b043008.png

    Hey Rosa, Josh says you can just walk…..

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5470743131262090bcef4415810f5fb91cfbaef602713ba4d1651010e5845c7f.jpg

  • Bones
  • $144948586

    After government destroyed Somalia, mind you.
    Life expectancy also went up 15 years in less than a decade, btw.

  • $144948586

    Jim Crow law was enforced by government, Bones.

  • Bones

    Actually Josh now seems more like one of those Sovereign Citizen types……

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKQNXY-9wD8

  • Ron McPherson

    But as a Christian, one might hope that you would be more sensitive to seeking justice for the black kid over that of upholding the rights of the racist owner. The real issue at stake is this: do you feel the racist owner should be allowed to discriminate on principle, or is it more about the fact that the kid can go get a sandwich somewhere else? If it’s the former, then the kid being able to get a sandwich elsewhere is irrelevant to the point. For if no one were forced to do business with the black kid, and every restaurant owner happened to be racist, then the kid can never get a sandwich.

  • Bones
  • $144948586

    “one might hope that you would be more sensitive to seeking justice for the black kid over that of upholding the rights of the racist owner.”
    They’re both humans Ron; I’m interested in seeking justice for both. Thus, no, I, rightfully, acknowledge that it’s unjust for me to make a racist person do what they don’t want to. BUT, I will seek justice for the black kid in that I will make them the best damn sandwich they ever had.

    “do you feel the racist owner should be allowed to discriminate on principle, or is it more about the fact that the kid can go get a sandwich somewhere else?”
    Do you mean do I think the racist owner should be allowed to serve or not serve whomever he wants for any reason whatsoever? Absolutely!
    I also believe it’s oppressive to prevent the kid from going elsewhere to grab a sandwich–unless everyone who made sandwiches happened to be so vehemently racist; they still reserve the right to refuse.

    “For if no one were forced to do business with the black kid, and every restaurant owner happened to be racist, then the kid can never get a sandwich.”
    But this is a suspension of reality, Ron.
    Why were Jim Crow laws legislated? Because blacks were legitimately competing with whites for work (this is the basis of minimum wage laws also, btw), and because businesses which also served blacks were running whites only businesses out of business.

  • $144948586

    Not after what socialism had done to it.

  • Bones

    Once again you don’t understand where laws come from……

    Why Libertarians (and Rand Paul) Are Wrong About the Civil Rights Act

    But even more deeply, the private/public distinction at the heart of the libertarian argument is flawed. As Justice Kennedy put it in his concurrence in Parents Involved: “The distinction between government and private action, furthermore, can be amorphous both as a historical matter and as a matter of present-day finding of fact. Laws arise from a culture and vice versa. Neither can assign to the other all responsibility for persisting injustices” (emphasis added).

    He’s absolutely right.

    In fact, the relationship between individual racist attitudes and law is at the heart of Chief Justice Taney infamous Dred Scot opinion. Chief Justice Taney held that persons of African descent were not – and could never be – citizens of the United States because white folks, not simply white governments, regarded them as inferior. It was the way in which white people in their private pursuits regarded black folk, not simply how states and white governments regarded them that was decisive:

    “[Persons of African descent] had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations; and so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold, and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever a profit could be made by it. This opinion was at that time fixed and universal in the civilized portion of the white race. It was regarded as an axiom in morals as well as in politics, which no one thought of disputing, or supposed to be open to dispute; and men in every grade and position in society daily and habitually acted upon it in their private pursuits, as well as in matters of public concern, without doubting for a moment the correctness of this opinion.”

    Because blacks were regarded as inferior, both in ‘morals as well as in politics,’ Chief Justice Taney reasoned that they could not possibly have been part of the political community that formed the nation, and therefore could not be full and equal citizens of that nation. It was the prejudices of white people, not the discrimination and prejudices of the states, that ultimately led the Chief Justice to inscribe a race line into the heart of American citizenship. The Fourteenth Amendment, the Reconstruction Amendment that underpins the Civil Rights Acts, was passed specifically for the purpose of overturning Chief Justice Taney’s legal holding. It did precisely that, first and foremost, by extending the status of national citizenship to all persons born or naturalized here, not simply white persons. And it was passed over the objection of President Johnson, who vetoed the precursor Civil Rights Act of 1866 precisely because he believed it went too far, reaching beyond state action and into private conduct, and was therefore unconstitutional. In fact, the Fourteenth Amendment was passed to override such objections, and put them to rest forever.

    The distinction that Rand Paul is making between private and public discrimination, between state sponsored segregation and Jim Crow and private discrimination, is a false one. Not only are laws a product of private values, but laws also drive and influence private attitudes. A history of race in North America makes clear that racial attitudes and racial prejudices were, in large measure, a product of colonial laws, such as colonial anti-miscegenation statutes, which accelerated the understanding of racial difference. In fact, colonial elites (the colonies were not democracies) passed the first anti-miscegenation law in 1662, and did so specifically to keep the races apart as a way of color-coding labor, a process instrumental to the development and promotion of racial prejudice that would accompany and come to justify full blown racial slavery. As Steve Martinot points out, if there had been general antipathy to mixed marriages, its occurrence would have been minimal or required no law to prevent. As a result, these colonial statutes, and others serving similar ends, were a precondition to the full development of a racial worldview, and the racial prejudice that it engendered.

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-menendian/why-libertarians-and-rand_b_591682.html

  • Bones

    “Why were Jim Crow laws legislated?”

    Because they reflected the attitudes and values of white people and white society going back to the 17th century..

  • Bones

    Lol……actually it’s what happens when government is destroyed…..tribal warlords and extremist militia run rampant……

    You’d love it.

    When ya moving?

  • Bones

    Nice attempt at deflecting btw…but you’d be saying to Rosa Parks and Ruby Bridges to go somewhere else.

  • $144948586

    “Once again you don’t understand where laws come from……”
    No, I do understand where laws come from. BUT if you don’t have government, you don’t have armies enforcing Jim Crow.
    The fact is Jim Crow laws were legislation (thus only have their existence owed to a legislative body), because blacks were “taking the jobs of whites” and being served “white sandwiches”.

  • $144948586

    “Because they reflected the attitudes and values of white people and white society going back to the 17th century..”
    I don’t disagree; but they were legislated because there was a legislative body.

    That being said, what do you care? It’s not like you believe this was wrong; their rights came from their government….they didn’t have any other rights, so it’s not worth b*tching about. Are you suggesting they had the right to be served by whites?

  • $144948586

    “actually it’s what happens when government is destroyed”
    I don’t disagree; thus dissolve the government before it destroys itself through socialist policy like this dictator.

  • $144948586

    No, I’d say that the bus line was legislated by the government.

  • Bones

    Lol…..it’s what happens when you don’t have government derpy, dictators take over.

  • Bones

    Lol, you still follow this dishonest line of thinking that people today cant judge other societies.

    Won’t work derp.

    Laws are a reflection of the attitudes of people (ie individuals) at the time. unfortunately for you the Old Testmaent was no better – probably even worse.

    “Are you suggesting they had the right to be served by whites?”

    Wtf?

    Do you have the right to be served by blacks, hispanics, women?

    What sort of a stupid question is that?

  • Bones

    Can you find the army in this picture????
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2db45a84600f8d3e74a54d74ca5db368e9a55eb560a7e852e321c9655b043008.png

    Laws reflect the values of society – in this case, white racists.

    Btw segregation of schools had been declared unconstitutional in 1953 but that didn’t stop racists.

    Lol Jim Crow was about more than white sandwiches and jobs.

    Do you people not know your own history?

    https://www.britannica.com/event/Jim-Crow-law

  • $144948586

    They had government; a dictator took it over and established a socialist regime. We now have the after effects of that: 30 years of impoverishing people and the spread of terrorist cells in to the region largely thanks to US government in the Middle East.

  • $144948586

    “you still follow this dishonest line of thinking that people today cant judge other societies.”
    I don’t believe that, but that’s what your opinion reduces to when you proclaim “rights come from government.”

    “What sort of a stupid question is that?”
    I’m honestly asking, did they, those people in the past, have the right to be served by whites?

  • $144948586

    “Do you people not know your own history?”
    That Jim Crow was instituted by government.

  • Bones

    On June 5, 1956, a Montgomery federal court ruled that any law requiring racially segregated seating on buses violated the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. That amendment, adopted in 1868 following the U.S. Civil War, guarantees all citizens—regardless of race—equal rights and equal protection under state and federal laws.

    The city appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which upheld the lower court’s decision on December 20, 1956. Montgomery’s buses were integrated on December 21, 1956, and the boycott ended. It had lasted 381 days.

    Integration, however, met with significant resistance and even violence. While the buses themselves were integrated, Montgomery maintained segregated bus stops. Snipers began firing into buses, and one shooter shattered both legs of a pregnant African-American passenger.

    In January 1957, four black churches and the homes of prominent black leaders were bombed; a bomb at King’s house was defused. On January 30, 1957, the Montgomery police arrested seven bombers; all were members of the Ku Klux Klan, a white supremacist group. The arrests largely brought an end to the busing-related violence.

    https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/montgomery-bus-boycott

  • $144948586

    Ok? What’s the point? Bus seating was legislated by government.

  • Ron McPherson

    “They’re both humans Ron; I’m interested in seeking justice for both.”

    Nope. Sorry. The only thing you’re telling the black kid is that he’ll have to try and get a sandwich somewhere else. That’s not seeking justice for him in any shape, form, or fashion. It also assumes every restaurant owner sells the same products. He would like to have had a pastrami sandwich from the place that rejected him. It should not be good enough for you that he must settle for a grilled cheese at the diner on the next block.

    “I will seek justice for the black kid in that I will make them the best damn sandwich they ever had.”

    Not if you’re unaware of it, nor if you don’t own a diner across the street from the racist one. See, your answer here trivializes, probably unwittingly, the trauma faced by very real victims of systemic racism.

    “I also believe it’s oppressive to prevent the kid from going elsewhere to grab a sandwich “

    How noble. Frankly, this is a copout. One is not seeking justice for another by merely not standing in that person’s way.

  • $144948586

    “Nope. Sorry. The only thing you’re telling the black kid is that he’ll have to try and get a sandwich somewhere else.”
    Now your just smearing me in very unChristlike fashion. What I’m telling the kid is, “I’ll get you a sandwich.”
    That IS seeking justice.

    “It also assumes every restaurant owner sells the same products.”
    No it doesn’t.

    “He would like to have had a pastrami sandwich from the place that rejected him.”
    Then that’s tough, but otherwise you’re enslaving the worker to make the sandwich.

    “It should not be good enough for you that he must settle for a grilled cheese at the diner on the next block.”
    Again, now you’re just smearing me.
    It wouldn’t be good enough for me, but that doesn’t mean I have the right to enslave the sandwich maker. I’ll sneak him a sandwich if I can, if he refuses me, then, again, that’s tough.

    “Not if you’re unaware of it”
    You just told me that I’ve told the kid, “he’ll have to try and get a sandwich somewhere else.”

    “nor if you don’t own a diner across the street from the racist one.”
    I have a kitchen, you know.

    “See, your answer here trivializes, probably unwittingly, the trauma faced by very real victims of systemic racism.”
    No, it doesn’t, because there is nothing systemic about a sandwich shop.
    AND, history shows that markets have rooted out racism: for God’s sake, the English and Muslims traded tea in the 1500’s. Similarly, minimum wage was instituted to stop blacks from competing against whites, BECAUSE green cares about only one color: GREEN.

    “How noble. Frankly, this is a copout.”
    No, that is oppression.

    “One is not seeking justice for another by merely not standing in that person’s way.”
    Of course not, that’s why’d I’d find them a sandwich. BUT, one is not seeking justice if one is willing to enslave another man.

  • Bones

    The point is legislation is representation of society eg large groups of individuals who in this case didn’t like black people.

  • Bones

    “I don’t believe that, but that’s what your opinion reduces to when you proclaim “rights come from government.”

    Stop lying for once.

    Rights do come from government.

    And government can take them away. As we see through Jim Crow laws or even those who break the law.

    That’s why people have to be vigilant about who they elect because legislation is representative of the people eg abortion.

    And yes I judge other societies based on human rights eg the Old Testament. That’s the standard by which we judge other countries and societies.

    “I’m honestly asking, did they, those people in the past, have the right to be served by whites?”

    And I’m honestly saying what sort of a stupid question is that?

    Do you have the right to be served by blacks, hispanics, women?

  • Bones
  • Bones
  • Bones
  • Bones
  • $144948586

    “Do you have the right to be served by blacks, hispanics, women?”
    No, not if they don’t want to. The government may make them, but that’s just slavery.

  • $144948586

    Crowding out effects are real, Bones.
    You Godman Keynes would agree.

  • $144948586

    Since right come from government, why is it wrong for governments to take them away?

  • Bones

    Because government SHOULD be about protecting it’s citizens and their human rights.

    But like churches, wolves are elected who tickle the ears of those who wish to take human rights away.

    Oh and on Natural Law

    Native Americans and Natural Law

    “But, with some exceptions, title to real estate in the U.S. originates with a grant from the United States Government. The government got it by taking it from someone else or sanctioning, after the fact, the taking the grantee had already accomplished. Property does not exist without the framework set up by the government and without its sanction. Without the legal framework, you don’t have property, you have stuff you have managed to acquire for awhile and which no one has yet taken from you.

    Americans, by and large, get very uncomfortable with the idea that property is a blessing of government. We like to pretend that government is a necessary evil (sometimes not even that) and don’t like to recognize that government is a fundamental underpinning for our whole way of life. When it comes to property, you’ll get some happy talk about natural rights or being endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights. But such talk is entirely inadequate for explaining why it is that the Native Americans don’t dominate the real estate market. The reason is that we alienated the hell out of their right to property and nature’s law didn’t lift a finger to stop us.”

    https://www.masson.us/blog/native-americans-and-natural-law/

  • Bones

    Yeah, I reckon police, fireies and others shouldn’t serve libertarians. After all they don’t need them.

    That’s not slavery, derp.

    You don’t even know what slavery is.

  • Bones
  • $144948586

    “Yeah, I reckon police, fireies and others shouldn’t serve libertarians.”
    If they’re extorting their money, they should.

    “That’s not slavery, derp.”
    So said the slave owner of that plantation.

    “You don’t even know what slavery is.”
    So said the sex trafficker.

    You’re just too much of a hypocrite to admit that it’s involuntary servitude.
    You’re too little of a man to be honest about it.

    Something about, “Righteousness must exceed that of the Pharisees.”
    Or something about, “Be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect.”

    What a weak person you are.

  • $144948586

    “Because government SHOULD be about protecting it’s citizens and their human rights.”
    But what is there to protect if a government simply decrees you don’t have [insert] right?

    You said rights come from government. Thus, what right does a person have if the government has declared they, in fact, don’t have the right.

    Take slavery: how was government wrong to support slavery (according to your statement that government gives rights) if it declared a black man was property?

  • Ron McPherson

    Well that’s good to know. Every oppressed minority can just go over to Josh’s house to be served. Just s mere couple of months ago a minority friend of mine was sitting with a white lady in a local restaurant and was asked to leave . And they did. Dead serious. I should just tell him to go over to Josh’s house if it ever happens again. That will fix everything.

  • Bones

    “But what is there to protect if a government simply decrees you don’t have [insert] right?”

    That’s already happened eg do you know nothing of womens, black and gay rights.

    So people fought for those rights and we have to be wary of those who will try to take them away (people like you actually).

    In fact you’re even against trans rights and wish to monitor which toilets they use.

    “ake slavery: how was government wrong to support slavery (according to your statement that government gives rights) if it declared a black man was property?”

    Stop being deliberately thick and obtuse. I’ve answered this half a dozen times.

    Where were natural rights for slaves and Indians?

    There were none.

    In fact your ancestors took their property from them.

    Now go back to telling us how you want to live under theocratic dictators who tell us who will and won’t have rights.

  • Bones

    Slave: someone who is legally owned by another person and is forced to work for that person without pay

    Lol…the biggest liar on the net is having a meltdown……

    Look it’s been difficult for you being exposed as a an abject liar whose hopelessly confused about his own politics and religion but hey that’s what happens when you think you’re better than everyone else.

    Now you may impress those at college who know f*** all about life but we see through your kind for the sad pathetic individuals you are.

    As for Jesus, you need to take your own medicine….

    Oh and…..

    Josh’s fire department….

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f028f131ab13fa4b44a9cf004b9657b066e7f123d3d0c8466e3e171d9d27d80f.png

  • Bones
  • Ron McPherson

    LOL!!!

  • Matthew

    Benjamin´s not gonna like this …

  • $144948586

    “someone who is legally owned by another person and is forced to work for that person without pay”
    I’ve got a taxpayer id and a state-licensed birth certificate. I’m forced to give my earnings away such that I work 3 months out of the year for government–that is for free.
    Slave.

  • $144948586

    ” I’ve answered this half a dozen times.”
    No, you seriously haven’t. You’ve said rights come from government. So why was government wrong to enslave blacks in 1800’s if they weren’t recognized as having rights? Why is it wrong?

  • $144948586

    “I should just tell him to go over to Josh’s house if it ever happens again.”

    That’s fine with me; or you could be a Christian and stop misdirecting and you could help them, or hell, criticize or boycott the restaurant.

    “That will fix everything.”
    By your own example, legislation didn’t; tell me again how anti-discrimination law is better than free markets.

    Right now, you understand what I’m saying, so your purposefully being deceitful Ron–you’re trying to win, but you know your being dishonest and won’t drop your pride. Hypocrite.

  • Ron McPherson

    You have an active imagination don’t you? I’m not trying to “win” anything. I’m trying, though obviously in vain, to plead for you to get your head out of the sand for a change and start acknowledging the real world, rather than dreaming of a capitalistic utopian society where free markets fix everything from racism to educating handicapped children. And yes, anti-discrimination laws are better than the free market. It didn’t eliminate racism, but my friend has it a hell of a lot better than he did decades ago. And for what it’s worth, I already am boycotting the restaurant.

  • $144948586

    ” I’m trying, though obviously in vain, to plead for you to get your head
    out of the sand for a change and start acknowledging the real world”
    Yet you believe it’s ok to enslave the racist guy for the sake of justice. That’s not justice, Ron. It’s enslavement; it doesn’t matter your motive.

    “It didn’t eliminate racism, but my friend has it a hell of a lot better than he did decades ago.”
    Laws don’t change hearts, Ron. Interaction is what has eliminated racism, and interaction is the primary thing of capitalism.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUDHZ5sYOZg
    That’s why it took law to suppress blacks during the Jim Crow era. Sure, racism wasn’t eliminated, but come on they were barely decades removed from slavery–yet, black people were finding work and being served–well before legislation “needed” to make it happen.

  • Ron McPherson

    “Yet you believe it’s ok to enslave the racist guy for the sake of justice. That’s not justice, Ron. It’s enslavement; it doesn’t matter your motive.“

    Say what?! It’s not ‘enslavement’ to force a fry cook to serve a black man a sandwich same as he would a white man. If that isn’t justice, then what is? Justice involves more than just putting a cold-blooded killer behind bars. Again, you seek ‘justice’ for the racist fry cook rather than for the one being discriminated against. And that’s ok to you because the black guy is ‘free’ get a sandwich elsewhere. Yeah, that’s what we had here decades ago. Blacks can’t sit in any seat on the bus? That’s ok, they were ‘free’ to go find another seat, like in the back of the bus. Let’s not seek justice for the black folks cause that would mean ‘enslaving’ the bus driver.

  • Ron McPherson

    Nope. The government is not forcing you to work for them. You are free to seek a life in another country just like to you the black man is free to seek a deli that isn’t racist.

  • $144948586

    Ron, that’s exactly what taxes are: your working for government. They are levied on the implication that the government has right to your labor: slavery.

  • $144948586

    “It’s not ‘enslavement’ to force a fry cook to serve a black man a sandwich same as he would a white man.”
    Use the same logic of a woman forced to give her body to a black man because she gave it to a white man.

  • $144948586

    “You are free to seek a life in another country just like to you the black man is free to seek a deli that isn’t racist.”
    This is a poor argument. On its face its hypocritical when, I’m sure, you were fighting for the civil right of gay marriage; I’m willing to bet you’d not have heeded your own advice by virtue of the fact that you’re still here.

    It’s also a fundamental mischaracterization.

    The sandwich maker is saying, “From me, you may not have a sandwich.” He’s not preventing anyone else from making sandwich, therefore he’s not oppressing anyone. He’s just discriminating with who is allowed to use his labor, not unlike you choosing who is and is not welcome in your home or who you date or marry.

    The Government however says, “you must serve anyonr who asks regardless of your desire.” The implication is that they reserve the right to your labor. That is oppression and enslavement. We can see this as a problem when we consider that you must have sex with whomever the government says even if you just want to be with one person or are attracted to one group of people.

    These are fundamentally different issues.

  • Ron McPherson

    “Use the same logic of a woman forced to give her body to a black man because she gave it to a white man.”

    So you equate a racist fry cook prohibited from discriminating against a black kid to that of a rape victim? Are you kidding me?

  • Ron McPherson

    “This is a poor argument. On its face its hypocritical when, I’m sure, you were fighting for the civil right of gay marriage; I’m willing to bet you’d not have heeded your own advice by virtue of the fact that you’re still here.“

    Well, you would be wrong because I wasn’t fighting for the right of gay marriage (though perhaps I should have) due to my own happy 29 year marriage to the mother of my children. However, I am in favor of the right to same sex marriage and if anything, my silence at that time reflected some self-centeredness on my part.

    At any rate, I’m not the one claiming that discrimination is ok. You’re the one who is claiming that a black kid is free to go elsewhere. I’m just using your own logic against you. Funny how it’s not such a great idea when the shoe happens to be on the other foot huh.

    I find it incredulous that you continue to be more concerned with upholding the right of the racist to discriminate over the rights of those who are his victims.

  • $144948586

    You are the one talking about the right to use force to serve a black man on the grounds that: “he [served] a white man.”

    Why is this scenario any different? They’re both the right to the person’s property (the woman’s body or the sandwich maker’s labor).

  • $144948586

    “I find it incredulous that you continue to be more concerned with
    upholding the right of the racist to discriminate over the rights of
    those who are his victims.”
    I promise I’m going somewhere with this, so please answer the question:

    What right does a man have over the body of a woman because she gave of herself to girls?

  • Larry TheKeyboardist Blake

    Guys, there’s no point in continuing to argue with Josh. He’s just like all those trolls who came to Ben’s blog last Summer to proselytize their bullshit and attack everyone else; he’s not interested in having a real discussion about the topic at hand; all he has ever intended to do is be an arrogant piece of trash. It’s better to just block him and not let him poison you.

  • Bones
  • Bones
  • Bones
  • $144948586

    It’s your right to be a selfish prick; at least then you’re not or a thief or a slave driver..

  • $144948586

    Still waiting an answer:
    You’ve said rights come from government. So why was government wrong
    to enslave blacks in 1800’s if they weren’t recognized as having rights?
    Why is it wrong?

  • Bones
  • Bones
  • $144948586

    Me thinks you have no answer; still waiting.

  • $144948586

    You’re right; it’s much better to circumvent their choice bill them later and destroy any estate they’d prefer passed on to their kids.

  • Bones
  • Bones
  • Bones

    Lol….the libertarian solution for climate change…..

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS55F36aMaY

  • $144948586

    You’ve said rights come from government. So why was government wrong
    to enslave blacks in 1800’s if they weren’t recognized as having rights?
    Why is it wrong?
    Still waiting for an answer.

  • $144948586

    You’ve said rights come from government. So why was government wrong
    to enslave blacks in 1800’s if they weren’t recognized as having rights?
    Why is it wrong?

  • $144948586
  • $144948586

    “he’s not interested in having a real discussion about the topic at hand”
    “Blessed are you when people falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.”

    “all he has ever intended to do is be an arrogant piece of trash.”
    “”Blessed are you when people insult you because of me.”

    “It’s better to just block him and not let him poison you.”
    “This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.”

  • Ron McPherson

    Josh,
    Our conversations have gone nowhere. With you:

    1. equating taxation to slavery, which to me trivializes the very real oppression suffered by black people in this country for centuries; and

    2. equating government workers to mobsters, which to me both trivializes the actual crimes of murder, pimping, extortion, and drug trafficking committed by criminals, while at the same time insults any government worker trying to make an honest living; and

    3. equating a racist fry cook being required to serve a black kid to that of a rape victim which, to me, trivializes a very real trauma experienced by abused women

    We’re just so many miles apart there is just no good reason to keep going unless you just haven’t gotten your fill of arguing. Personally, I’ve had a belly full of it. Apparently, I can’t think like you do, nor can you think like I do. So let’s move on.

  • $144948586

    I still would like to know your thoughts:
    What right does a man have over the body of a woman because she gave of herself to girls?

  • $144948586

    For the record:

    1. That doesn’t change the very real nature that taxation is enslavement, just in not as cruel a form–you are forced to work for free.

    2. This doesn’t change the fact that if you refuse to pay what they’ve billed you, they will come in your house and drag you out or kill you trying.

    3. Please tell me, Ron: What right does a man have over the body of a woman because she gave of herself to girls?

  • Bones

    I never said anything about crowd size derpy.

    But I see you’re infatuated with me.

    Sorry dude, I’m married.

  • Bones
  • apoxbeonyou

    You ain’t worth it, troll.

  • $144948586

    Man, now that’s sad.

  • Ron McPherson

    “I still would like to know your thoughts:
    What right does a man have over the body of a woman because she gave of herself to girls?”

    Why should I believe you’re interested in my thoughts when you and I both know that the answer here is that the man has no right over the body of a woman (btw I trust this makes you pro-choice). You’ll pardon me for saying that it appears that you just want to keep arguing.

    On its surface, the question itself is rhetorical and, well, stupid. We all know you’re equating a racist fry cook to a rape victim and its frankly absurd and demeaning to real rape victims.

    A fry cook being compelled to serve a black kid a sandwich (and still getting paid for it to boot) like he would a white kid is not being victimized like a woman who is being physically assaulted. The cook engages in a public business and must abide by the law. He can not discriminate nor can he serve spoiled food. The govt regulates he keep his kitchen clean as well. I’m thankful for that. I don’t know why you wouldn’t be either.

    I’m pretty certain you wouldn’t want to feed your kids a happy meal where the meat is spoiled. Yeah I know your answer to that is that capitalism fixes all that cause the restaurant wouldn’t stay in business very long, which would be little consolation to you as a parent while your child is suffering from food poisoning.

    Instead of digging in your heals on this topic and doubling down on your point, you seriously might want to spend some time on self examination as to why you see the racist here as the victim rather than the black kid being discriminated against.

    I’m done talking about this. It’s going nowhere. Call me anti-Christ, hypocrite, whatever. People can read through this entire thread and come to their own conclusions.

  • $144948586

    “A fry cook being compelled to serve a black kid a sandwich (and still getting paid for it to boot)”
    So he’d have a right to her body if he just paid her afterward, is that what you’re suggesting? You have no choice so long as money is being offered to you?

  • Ron McPherson

    Obtuse: adjective
    – annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand

  • $144948586

    Are prostitutes not an actual thing? Would a man have a right to a prostitutes body just because she gave herself the girls? Does money have some magical power to make compulsion legitimate?

  • Bones

    Lol, Josh is anti-abortion…….

  • Bones

    Yes, you are…..

  • Bones
  • Bones

    You know Ron after watching the Walking Dead and Z-Nation, I realised that would be Josh’s paradise….no government and you just go around doing whatever the hell you want..

  • Bones

    Ergo the Koch Brothers love you.

    Once again you post bs right wing propaganda…..

    Acton Institute

    The Acton Institute has received funding from organizations with links to the Koch brothers. See funding section below. Acton is also a partner organization of the Charles G. Koch “Professional Education” program.

    Ties to the Bradley Foundation
    Through 2016 the Acton Institute received $3,132,000 from the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation.

    Bradley detailed the most recent grants in internal documents examined by the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD). Below is a description of the grant prepared by CMD. The quoted text was written by Bradley staff.

    2016: $150,000 to support general operations. Bradley mentions Acton University, the research department, and the “Poverty Cure Initiative” as endeavors worth funding.

    2014: $125,000 to support general operations. Acton Institute events that stand out to Bradley: Acton University and its “Toward a Free and Virtuous Society.”

    Bradley Files
    In 2017, the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD), publishers of SourceWatch, launched a series of articles on the Milwaukee-based Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, exposing the inner-workings of one of America’s largest right-wing foundations. 56,000 previously undisclosed documents laid bare the Bradley Foundation’s highly politicized agenda. CMD detailed Bradley’s efforts to map and measure right wing infrastructure nationwide, including by dismantling and defunding unions to impact state elections; bankrolling discredited spin doctor Richard Berman and his many front groups; and more.

    Find the series here at ExposedbyCMD.org.

    https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Acton_Institute

    Just stick to dishonest graphs…..

  • Bones

    Derp, I said nothing about numbers.

    You obviously can’t read.

    You might be gay bro, but I’m not.

    You better look somewhere else.

  • Bones

    “”Blessed are you when people falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.””

    Are you blaiming your lies on Jesus????

  • Bones

    I realise this is a waste of time……but poor ol Rick doesn’t want kids trained for the future.

    Coding In Education: Why It’s Important & How It’s Being Implemented

    https://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/features/coding-education-important-implemented/

  • $144948586

    Well I’m falsely accused for speaking truth. There’s only one Truth, so…

  • $144948586

    “The Acton Institute has received funding from organizations with
    links to the Koch brothers. See funding section below. Acton is also a
    partner organization of the Charles G. Koch “Professional Education”
    program.”

    So? And Jesus, I’m sure, had tax collectors like Matthew donate money, but I’m not one to question his intentions for taking money that was undoubtedly sourced through coercion as all taxes and salaries of public workers are.

  • Ron McPherson

    “Are prostitutes not an actual thing? Would a man have a right to a prostitutes body just because she gave herself the girls? Does money have some magical power to make compulsion legitimate?”

    If you cannot grasp the fundamental difference between the necessity of law with respect to serving the general public at large vs one’s legitimate right to establish boundaries with respect to their own personage, then I’m afraid the lack of commonality between our views is even worse than I thought.

  • $144948586

    “one’s legitimate right to establish boundaries with respect to their own personage”
    Is not a person’s labor a part of their person?

  • Ron McPherson

    Obtuse: adjective
    – annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand

  • $144948586

    Then please answer the question:
    What right does a man have over the body of a woman because she gave of herself to girls?

  • Ron McPherson

    Obtuse: adjective
    – annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand

  • $144948586

    You can’t even affirm that there is no precedent which allows a man to rape a woman;
    This is what loving darkness looks like.

  • Ron McPherson

    You just can’t help yourself can you?

  • $144948586

    I’m just waiting for your answer.

  • Ron McPherson

    “You can’t even affirm that there is no precedent which allows a man to rape a woman; This is what loving darkness looks like…I’m just waiting for your answer.”

    I answered already. I said, “you and I both know…that the man has no right over the body of a woman.” You even responded. How many different ways do I need to answer this?

    Contentious: adjective
    – given to arguing or provoking argument

  • $144948586

    “I answered already. I said, “you and I both know…that the man has no right over the body of a woman.” You even responded. How many different ways do I need to answer this?”
    Great; why doesn’t he have the right over the woman’s body? After all, she was giving herself to women, so why should she be allowed to not “serve men”?

  • Ron McPherson

    Give it up

  • $144948586

    It’s important, Ron. Why is that “the man has no right over the body of a woman” even though she’s given herself to girls?

  • Ron McPherson

    This crossed the absurd line days ago

  • $144948586

    That’s not a why, Ron. Why doesn’t he have that right?

  • $144948586

    Here, I’ll help you. You said it yourself, “one [has] legitimate right to establish boundaries with respect to their own personage”.

    When I inquired, “Is not a person’s labor a part of their person?”
    You accused me of being obtuse and misdirected.

    You claim that their is a fundamental difference somewhere “between the necessity of law with respect to serving the general public
    at large vs one’s legitimate right to establish boundaries with respect
    to their own personage”, BUT you refuse to acknowledge that the right to one’s body (and thus the things it produces) are the same whether or not one is demanding sex or sandwiches. This is much more fundamental, because it’s the same basic principle: to demand something produced from the boundaries of another’s “personage” who is unwilling is enslavement, it is rape.

    You acknowledge that one (making sandwiches) is more legitimate than the other (rape). Well, I got news for you: some regard rape as legitimate. What makes you right compared to them?

  • Ron McPherson

    “You acknowledge that one (making sandwiches) is more legitimate than the other (rape). Well, I got news for you: some regard rape as legitimate. What makes you right compared to them?”

    And this is why we have laws. They are necessary for social order and to protect individuals from being de-humanized by people who cannot distinguish the moral difference between rape against another’s body vs that of compelling a business owner to not refuse a black kid a sandwich same as he would a white one. Most understand the obvious distinction. Some for whatever reason do not, which is the reason we have laws. Thanks for clearly demonstrating the need for government intervention.

  • $144948586

    “Most understand the obvious distinction.”
    What is the “obvious distinction”?
    Allow me to clarify:
    Why is it morally wrong to rape a woman?
    Why is it not morally wrong to force a business to make a sandwich?
    Is it morally wrong to force an individual to make a sandwich?

  • Matthew

    But the flavor says “BUTTER”!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiU_YTNW5ns

  • Ron McPherson

    “Why is it morally wrong to rape a woman?”

    Because it is physical assault against another and is an act of dehumanization.

    “Why is it not morally wrong to force a business to make a sandwich?”

    Why is it not morally wrong to shun a customer on the basis of their skin color?

    “Is it morally wrong to force an individual to make a sandwich?”

    Not when that individual is in the public sphere and is in business to make sandwiches during the hours and days that the business is open.

  • TS (unami)

    @disqus_JGKCqOR30g:disqus just said,

    “Why is it morally wrong to rape a woman?”

    Can you believe that he *actually* said that?!?

  • $144948586

    “Not when that individual is in the public sphere and is in business to make sandwiches during the hours and days that the business is open.”
    Oh ok, so in Reno, NV they allow prostitution in the form of brothels and most cities tacitly allow prostitution via escort services due to a simple redefinition of what exactly you’re paying for “company” instead of sex.
    So I take it you would say that the woman being paid for her “company” isn’t allowed to deny her client when he wants it?

    In regards to your question:
    “Why is it not morally wrong to shun a customer on the basis of their skin color?”
    You appear to imply that it’s only morally wrong to do so in the public sphere: “Not when that individual is in the public sphere.”
    Thus you appear to imply that it’s not morally wrong to do so in the confines of your private property. Thus, it appears that when a person moves in to the public sphere (as defined by government), they must somehow cease to be human–forgoing all conviction on their hearts. But according to Genesis God has made humans; so if the public sphere can turn humans into non-humans, what does that make government?

  • $144948586

    TS, defining something as wrong doesn’t make it so. To be wrong implies that their is a reason besides just saying, “It’s wrong.” I’m asking, “What makes rape morally wrong?”

    But you’re too busy loving darkness that you see my question as some kind of doubt as to the immorality of rape. And that IS morally wrong.
    Hypocrite.

  • Ron McPherson

    Your standard of morality, my standard of morality, and the standard of morality for the guy down the street may all differ. That’s why there are laws Josh. By the way, with every post you’re doing a great job of showing the necessity for government to establish social order. Thanks. You’ve actually been a great help.

  • $144948586

    “Your standard of morality, my standard of morality, and the standard of morality for the guy down the street may all differ.”
    Oh ok, I get, so government actually defines morality.
    That sounds an awful lot like God, Ron.

  • TS (unami)

    You’re the hypocrite, in one breath trying to twist the morality that says that rape is *always wrong* into something else, and then using that same twisted reasoning to try to denigrate me.

    Rape is always wrong.
    And you know this.

  • $144948586

    “that says that rape is *always wrong* into something else”
    Whoa whoa, when did I do this?

  • Ron McPherson

    It’s bizarre. He thinks the greater evil is perpetrated against a racist for not allowing him to discriminate against a black kid, than it would be subjecting a black kid to being refused service merely because he’s black. And then doubles down by equating anti discrimination laws to rape. But it’s ok to him because the black kid could presumably go down the street to get a sandwich from a non-racist. So that makes everything right. What he apparently can’t see is that his principle in advocating for one racist means he would by extension advocate for another racist, and on and on. So ultimately in Josh’s world, the black kid is never served a sandwich if every deli owner in his town happens to be racist.

  • TS (unami)

    Look above.

  • TS (unami)

    Exactly. Apparently he’s never heard of the Civil Rights era.

  • Ron McPherson

    We have laws in place to govern social order. It’s against the law to rape, discriminate or murder. Call it God if you want. Otherwise, there are no repercussions to the guy who somehow thinks it’s moral to rape women, or refuse service to a black kid.

  • TS (unami)

    You must be trying hard to pull my chain…

    “TS, defining something as wrong doesn’t make it so. To be wrong implies that their is a reason besides just saying, “It’s wrong.” I’m asking, “What makes rape morally wrong?”

    You seriously have to even *ask* that question?

  • $144948586

    Oh ok, so we can’t ask questions anymore?

    It wasn’t surreptitious; it wasn’t implying anything, it was a question, TS. You act like this, you deserve to be called a hypocrite. To treat another as untruthful for the simple asking of a question IS THOROUGHLY un-Christlike, hypocrite.

  • $144948586

    “It’s against the law to rape, discriminate or murder.”
    Are you saying that the only reason these things are morally wrong is because government has said so?

  • Ron McPherson

    No

  • TS (unami)

    Oh, please!
    Don’t lecture me about hypocrisy when you lable anyone who challenges you “unchristlike” and a hypocrite. Good grief.

    You seen to have a problem defining rape as a moral evil. You asked the question, so let’s hear *your* answer to your *own* question, Josh!

  • $144948586

    Ok so again I ask, beginning with your response:
    “”Not when that individual is in the public sphere and is in business to make sandwiches during the hours and days that the business is open.”
    In Reno, NV they allow prostitution in the form of brothels and most cities tacitly allow prostitution via escort services due to a simple redefinition of what exactly you’re paying for “company” instead of sex.
    So I take it you would say that the woman being paid for her “company” isn’t allowed to deny her client when he wants it?

  • $144948586

    “You seen to have a problem defining rape as a moral evil.”
    Where have I done this?

    “You asked the question, so let’s hear *your* answer to your *own* question, Josh!”
    Fine; rape is morally wrong, because the most fundamental tenet of natural law from an atheist or Christian is that humans don’t own one another, inherently. Thus, rape is wrong BECAUSE a man does not own the woman. Because of this, it matters not if she’s in the business of sex.

    As she OWNS HER BODY, she is free to give to and withhold it from whomever she wants whenever she wants. Any violation of this fact is a violation of her body (her property), and thus it constitutes aggression and, inherently, is an immoral act.

  • TS (unami)

    *clap, clap*
    Good.
    So, why did you ask the question to Ron in the first place? We ALL know that rape is morally wrong.

  • $144948586

    “So, why did you ask the question to Ron in the first place? We ALL know that rape is wrong.”
    Because I want to know Ron’s answer for how he defines it as wrong.

  • TS (unami)

    No you don’t. You were deflecting from his points made to you about discrimination.

  • $144948586

    “No you don’t. You were deflecting from his points made to you about discrimination.”
    Actually, no.
    I was specifically asking him how he defines things to be morally wrong. Because he defined the black kid as having a right to the sandwich maker’s sandwiches, because he was serving white people and not black people (and that he owned a business). So I simply asked about a situation of a woman who only “serves” women. Then it got to here.

    The point of which is to prove that his definition of morally wrong is either undefined or piss poor.

  • TS (unami)

    You obviously have no understanding of the implications and legal reality of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

  • Ron McPherson

    The distinction in my book, and apparently in our society as well, relates to the individual’s own body, so no, a woman should not be forced to have sex (that’s assault and rape) under any scenario, legal prostitute or not.

    How many times do you want to keep going in circles on this? For you to try and equate rape, even in theory, with one’s labor to make a sandwich is flabbergasting. Same with selling a car battery at Napa. Seriously, if you cannot see the difference here between one’s own body and a grilled cheese sandwich, then there are bigger issues here that obviously cannot be resolved on a blog forum.

    Ethics and standards of morality obviously differ among individuals comprising the citizenry. As such, we have a republic that serves its citizenry through elected representation whereby the social order is often governed, by necessity, through laws. Those laws may often align with my standards, and in other cases they may not. But it’s part of living in a society where my “rights” aren’t the only ones that matter.

  • $144948586

    “You obviously have no understanding of the implications and legal reality of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”
    I’m not going to debate the Civil Rights Act until we get a clear understanding of morality here.

  • TS (unami)

    Then we’re done.

  • $144948586

    “The distinction in my book…relates to the individual’s own body, so no, a woman should not be forced to have sex (that’s assault and rape) under any scenario, legal prostitute or not.”
    I applaud your response.

    “For you to try and equate rape, even in theory, with one’s labor to make a sandwich is flabbergasting. Same with selling a car battery at Napa. ”
    They use their bodies to produce these things, Ron.

    What’s the distinguishing characteristic here?

  • $144948586

    That’s cool; take care!

  • TS (unami)

    You too — have a nice day.

  • Jif Bumpkins

    I dont see the problem here, your child walked out of class for no legitimate reason and got punished for it. This is how schools have worked for hundreds of years.

  • Ron McPherson

    “’The distinction in my book…relates to the individual’s own body, so no, a woman should not be forced to have sex (that’s assault and rape) under any scenario, legal prostitute or not.’
    I applaud your response.“

    I take it then that you’re pro-choice?

  • $144948586

    “I take it then that you’re pro-choice?”
    I’ll be glad to answer this, but I don’t want to lose our train of thought:

    Would you please answer the question asked previously:
    What’s the distinguishing characteristic here?

  • Ron McPherson

    Look Josh, I’ve played 20 questions with you for a week. This “train of thought” is going nowhere. We both know where the other stands. So again I ask, are you pro choice? The question literally required between 2 and 3 keystrokes to answer, either a no or a yes. If you’re in favor of government intervention with respect to having access to a woman’s womb, then it totally obliterates any point you have made so far.

  • $144948586

    “If you’re in favor of government intervention with respect to having access to a woman’s womb, then it totally obliterates any point you have made so far.”
    I’m not; in fact, I got in a heated debate with a religiously conservative catholic friend of mine just the other day concerning this issue.

    Having answered that, would you please answer mine?

  • Ron McPherson

    So pro choice?

  • $144948586

    Before I answer, would you affirm that the vast majority of abortions are for pregnancies that are consequence of voluntary conception? That is, the sex was non-coerced?

  • Ron McPherson

    If you believe the govt has no right to a woman’s womb, why does that matter?

  • $144948586

    “If you believe the govt has no right to a woman’s womb, why does that matter?”
    Because I’ve already conceded that I’m not supportive of government intervention of the matter. So, will you please affirm that?

  • Ron McPherson

    Yes that would be my assumption

  • $144948586

    Thank you.
    Well, as soon as sperm meets egg, if left to nature that “thing” will become a human being–for all intents and purposes it is a human that just hasn’t fully grown. This implies the inherent, inalienable right to own themselves. Thus, abortion is an act of aggression; therefore, I would say the mother does not have the right to kill the child. So no, I’m not pro-choice.

  • Ron McPherson

    So you’re in favor of the govt having access to the mother’s womb?

  • $144948586

    “So you’re in favor of the govt having access to the mother’s womb?”
    Absolutely not. Just because someone doesn’t have a right to murder doesn’t mean they don’t murder.

    But just because Suzy decides to have an abortion, or Frank has murder in his heart, this doesn’t give me license to take money from Joe, Tracy and Patrick (who live 3000 miles away) to pay for some law force in my neighborhood to stop Suzy and Frank and patrol my neighborhood for fear that someone out there is going to murder.

  • Ron McPherson

    “’So you’re in favor of the govt having access to the mother’s womb?’
    Absolutely not.”

    Explain to me how that’s not pro-choice.

  • $144948586

    “Explain to me how that’s not pro-choice.”
    I don’t acknowledge that a woman has a right to do whatever she wants with that fetus.

  • Ron McPherson

    Are you in favor of making abortions illegal? If not, then that’s tacitly pro-choice. You may be philosophically or ethically against the procedure itself, but ultimately feel the govt has no right to stop a woman from having one. That ultimately allows her to make the choice apart from govt intervention, which is, well, pro-choice.

  • $144948586

    “Are you in favor of making abortions illegal?”
    Absolutely, just not by using government.
    I’ll tell you this: abortions are “illegal” in my house.

    “[You] ultimately feel the govt has no right to stop a woman from having one. That ultimately allows her to make the choice apart from govt intervention”
    This is true.

    “which is, well, pro-choice.”
    No, it’s not. If someone decides to smoke cigarettes and I don’t stop them, that doesn’t make me pro-smoking.

  • Ron McPherson

    “No, it’s not. If someone decides to smoke cigarettes and I don’t stop them, that doesn’t make me pro-smoking.“

    No, but it makes you pro-choice with respect to smoking because you don’t believe there should be laws standing in the way of them lighting up a Marlboro. You’re misunderstanding what pro-choice involves. You sound like a politician vainly trying to garner republican votes while playing with semantics. “I’m not pro-choice because I believe abortion is wrong.” Being pro-choice is independent upon your personal convictions about the matter. Being pro-choice is not necessarily the same thing as being pro-abortion. I never asked you if your pro-abortion. I asked if you were pro-choice. Sorry, not the same thing

  • $144948586

    “Being pro-choice is independent upon your personal convictions about the matter.”
    Fair enough; I’m pro-being allowed enough freedom to potentially commit murder.

  • Ron McPherson

    Call abortion what you want but that’s pro-choice.

  • $144948586

    Then that’s fine.
    That still doesn’t mean she has a right to abort any more than a man has the right to murder just because he has the privacy to.

    Would you please answer my question prior to this discussion?

  • Bones

    Rubbish!

  • Bones

    Fun fact: Your opinion isn’t truth.

  • Bones
  • Ron McPherson

    Which one? There have been so many. Is it the one asking why rape is wrong?

  • $144948586

    No, you argued:
    “The distinction in my book…relates to the individual’s own body,
    so no, a woman should not be forced to have sex (that’s assault and
    rape) under any scenario, legal prostitute or not.”
    “For you to try and equate rape, even in theory, with one’s labor to make a sandwich is flabbergasting. Same with selling a car battery at Napa.”

    To which I responded, “They use their bodies to produce these things, Ron.”

    What’s the distinguishing characteristic here?

  • Matthew

    Funny stuff bones!

  • Ron McPherson

    I’ll say it again. The distinction, as I see it, relates to the individual’s own body. Under your scenario, the product being sold is one’s own personage for sexual favors. In the other scenario, the product being sold is the sandwich, not the fry cook himself.

  • Bones
  • Bones

    Ron, you see this picture….

    According to the arse clown you’re debating those poor white people were raped…..or some stupid moronic equivalence.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2db45a84600f8d3e74a54d74ca5db368e9a55eb560a7e852e321c9655b043008.png

    You know it makes sense.

  • Bones

    RIP Emma…..The Vicar of Dibley and Rev really are wonderful shows….

    But for the catholics…..

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/97e368f313e8d2efd15d99cbb52595c97b5e7bf4977fbfdfb3f2392fe601632b.jpg

  • Bones
  • R/R 2016

    My goodness this is stupid. An excused absence is not civil disobedience, Ben. Teach your daughter that protest is never cheap. Have her stand for what she thinks is right and damn the consequences.

  • Ron McPherson

    It blows my mind that he thinks the racists are the victims lol

  • Bones

    His arguments are juvenile and there’s no point in responding to him.

    And of course when you smash his stupidity he just changes subject.

    He’s the ultimate college pseudo intellectual who knows stuff all about life in the real world.

    Oh and why are there no Libertarian Paradises…..

    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Libertarian_paradise

    And he was bitching to his mates as to why we don’t understand his point of view.

    Well I wonder why?????

  • $144948586

    “the product being sold is one’s own personage for sexual favors.”
    No, the product being sold is sex via the use of her own personage.

    Similarly, the product being sold is a sandwich via the use of his own personage.

    She’s not selling her “the use of” her body anymore than he’s selling “the use of” his.
    Why is using one’s hands (presumably not using his feet) to make a sandwich any less relevant than using a different body part–presumably she could just be using the same body part?

  • Ron McPherson

    Most ancaps are young American white males. How shocking lol

  • Ron McPherson

    Lol. You remind me of a gnat Josh. Relatively harmless, but bothersome still the same.

  • $144948586

    If it isn’t clicking, does a masseuse have the right to deny clients based on their gender?

  • $144948586

    I’m looking forward to your answer here.

  • Ron McPherson

    You’re coming perilously close to troll-like behavior with your continuously poking at me to play your games. We know your stance. You equate taxation to slavery and anti-discrimination laws to rape. And most sane people see that as nonsensical. Try this. Go stand on a street corner and ask your questions to the first 20 people you meet. Then report back here to describe the looks you get. You never know, there may even be a few responses that help you understand the difference between forcible sex and making a pastrami sandwich.

  • $144948586

    Forcible sex isnt forcible if its voluntary, Ron. But I note that you wont answer the question. Is that right?

  • Ron McPherson

    “Forcible sex isnt forcible if its voluntary”

    Duh!

    “But I note that you wont answer the question. “

    This is the last question I’m going to answer. A masseuse in a public business, in my opinion, should be subject to anti-discrimination laws just like the fry cook.

  • $144948586

    Ron, you write:

    “A masseuse in a public business, in my opinion, should be subject to anti-discrimination laws just like the fry cook.”

    Yet, when I asked about a prostitute, a legal one such as in Nevada or the tacit approval of escorts services, you say the opposite on the grounds of “Under [legal prostitution], the product being sold is one’s own personage for sexual favors.” And thus you allow the right of this person to discriminate.

    But, what is the fundamental difference between a prostitute and a masseuse? In what way is a prostitute selling “one’s own personage” that a masseuse is not?

    If you say “it’s because of sexual favors”, then what about a stripper? They’re in the same vein as masseuses in terms of a being in a public business, but theirs is definitely in regards to sexual favors.

    I appreciate your responses; I truly do.

  • $144948586

    I have retorted this response back at the OP here.

  • Ron McPherson

    That’s why I’m referring to with respect to forcible sex. No one (including a prostitute) should be subjected to sex without consent.

  • $144948586

    But that’s the business she’s in, and she “gets paid to boot”; isn’t that how you said it?

    What makes her so special that she’s allowed to be treated differently than the masseuse or the sandwich maker?

  • Ron McPherson

    It’s this thing called rape. It’s unlawful for a reason. I’m tired of going around in circles with you on this.

  • $144948586

    “It’s this thing called rape.”
    And forcing a person to make a sandwich is called enslavement.

    Didn’t the sandwich maker, stripper, and masseuse give up that right by opening a business?

  • Ron McPherson

    Aaaaannnndddd……we’re back to where we started. Nothing accomplished. Let’s move on.

  • $144948586

    “we’re back to where we started. Nothing accomplished. ”
    I’m sorry, but how can you say “nothing is accomplished.”
    You refused to accept that a sandwich maker can discriminate against a black kid on the grounds that he owns a business in the public arena. As such, it’s not enslavement because he must serve everyone indiscriminately.
    You even hold this to be true for masseuses and strippers.

    Yet, you don’t hold this to be true for brothel woman, because “forcing her to have sex without consent is rape.” But by your admission, a business in a public arena loses the right to discriminate as to which customers are served–in effect, she can’t be raped, because she’s already volunteered her services just like a masseuse and a stripper and a sandwich maker.

    These groups are under the exact same public accommodation law you love to use.
    If you hold that the legal prostitute cannot be forced to have sex against her will but you also believe a sandwich maker can be forced to make a sandwich against his will, then you’re showing favoritism. You are a bigot. You are an authoritarian. You are a fascist. You are the oppressor.

  • Ron McPherson

    “You are a bigot. You are an authoritarian. You are a fascist. You are the oppressor.”

    Thanks Josh. I’ll add all those to the others you’ve called me, like hypocrite and anti-Christ.

  • $144948586

    Ron, I’m trying to help you.

    These things are exactly what you’re being when you choose who’s in and who’s out. You think you’re doing a good thing, but you’re not. You’re just oppressing those whom society (and people like Benjamin Corey) have convinced you are the oppressors…but they’d never have done anything “morally wrong” let alone illegal if a black kid never chose to walk in their store.

    I’m not defending racism, but I do defend the right to be a racist. No, I don’t condone forcing gay people to not be able to get married, but I do defend the right of a priest who disagrees with their union to not perform the services. Likewise, I defend the right a bakery owner to say, “I don’t want to be the one to make your cake.”

    If you say they can’t do this because they own a public business, then you necessarily, if the law is to be applied equally, must condone the ability of a customer to use the services of a prostitute who would not consent. You are the one that must condone rape.

    Otherwise, you are an oppressor to the bakery owner.

    I’ll let your cognitive dissonance fester; it will feel like hell, because “progressive” ideas such as these ARE hell.

  • Ron McPherson

    You obviously have no clue how ridiculous you come off lecturing me and others on why people should be allowed to be racists. You have much to learn friend. I would encourage you to educate yourself, not from theories, but talking and becoming acquainted with victims of racism, those living in terrible conditions. I know a 76 year old pastor who has experienced it. You are clueless. This man was with MLK the day he was shot, at the hotel. I was with him just today. You have no idea what these people went through and the sacrifices made on behalf of those victimized by racism. And for you to label me a bigot, when I AM THE ONE AGAINST DISCRIMINATION AND IN SUPPORT OF LAWS PROHIBITING SUCH, is absolutely astounding.

  • $144948586

    “You obviously have no clue how ridiculous you come off lecturing me and others on why people should be allowed to be racists.”
    It might seem ridiculous, but in the other case I’d have to choose to be an oppressor.

    “You have no idea what these people went through and the sacrifices made on behalf of those victimized by racism.”
    I don’t doubt that they had to make sacrifices (particularly due to the way government treated them. That being said, it doesn’t give the right to oppress those who weren’t guilty of oppressing through the use of “public accommodation” law. Yet that’s what you’re doing. You’re either forcing a man to make a sandwich AND forcing a prostitute to have sex, or you’re showing favoritism and exercising your fascist bigotry.

    “I AM THE ONE AGAINST DISCRIMINATION AND IN SUPPORT OF LAWS PROHIBITING SUCH”
    No, you’re just discriminating against the other discriminator.

    It’s bigotry.

  • Ron McPherson

    “I don’t doubt that they had to make sacrifices (particularly due to the way government treated them.”

    Dear God, you are so clueless

  • $144948586

    Fine fine, stand aghast at my words all you want. That still doesn’t excuse you from your hypocrisy.

  • Ron McPherson

    It’s no secret that an anarcho-capitalist ideology typically comes from young, white males, usually American, which is understandable given that they have never experienced racism and are oblivious to how it devalues its victims. They have no context other than their own experiences.

    You are wise, but only in your own eyes (or maybe to like-minded individuals like yourself). Most anarcho-capitalists do not support anti-discrimination laws because they’ve been raised in a society that does not inherently erect barriers to economic success. They don’t know what they don’t know, which is why it’s funny (well actually it’s more sad really) that you assume an air of condescension as if you are qualified to speak into these issues. This is my last post to you. Have the last word if you wish. Just know that more of your condescending drivel will be ignored.

  • $144948586

    Look at Bones making stuff up, again.
    If anyone actually has read my stuff on here or asked me point blank,
    1. I don’t oppose gay marriage. I just don’t think the government should be in the business of determining who is and who isn’t married. Marriage is a spiritual institution concerning our souls.
    2. I don’t oppose abortion. People just ain’t gonna have one on my property.

    But what else do I expect from a cog who thinks he can only live and think the way government has told him to?

  • $144948586

    It’s no secret that an anarcho-capitalist ideology typically comes from young, white males, usually American, which is understandable given that they have never experienced racism and are oblivious to how it devalues its victims. ”
    This changes nothing about the immorality of oppression, or the hypocrisy inherent in oppressing discriminators by discriminating at the point of a national gun.

    “Most anarcho-capitalists do not support anti-discrimination laws because they’ve been raised in a society that does not inherently erect barriers to economic success.”
    Please, insert government in place of “society”. Name one society whose government is not the very thing hindering economic success.

    “as if you are qualified to speak into these issues.”
    As a lover of peace, I am qualified to speak on the issue of oppression.
    To make the claim that I’m not qualified when CLEARLY, LOGICALLY your espousing authoritarian beliefs means your reaching toward supremacy to try and stop me.

    It’s not condescending to call a hypocrite a hypocrite, a bigot a bigot, a fascist a fascist, an anti-Christ idea anti-Christ, or to tell you that you are the one constructing the hell you live in via clinging to your cognitive dissonance. It’s going to burn you, Ron–in fact it already has when I see the degradation spewed at me in your follows ups to persons like Bones and Matthew; it’s highly unChristlike.

    To tell you that you are an oppressor is not condescension, Ron. It’s love; you’d recognize that if you didn’t love darkness more than truth.

    I’ll tell you what though, when you’re finally willing to accept it I’ll be here with gracious speech for you. As for now, my telling you that you are a bigot is a mercy, and I give that to you because I love you.

  • $144948586

    “It’s no secret that an anarcho-capitalist ideology typically comes from young, white males, usually American, which is understandable given that they … are oblivious to how it devalues its victims.”
    For the record, this is non-sense. Anarcho-capitalism has human value as its primary principle: the individual and his rights are supreme above all else, not a king, nor an enslaver, not a government.
    How can one be devalued in such a system?

  • D.M.S.

    Abortion is MURDER!

  • Bones

    Oh yeah that’s right…and you were going off about transpeople using the wrong toilets.

    The Libertarian toilet police.

  • Ron McPherson

    LOL!!!

  • Ron McPherson

    He accused me of being a fascist, hypocrite, oppressor, authoritarian, and bigot because I would take a stand for black people rather than for racists. I’m not making this up. He thinks he’s actually seeking justice for both the racist and black people by, now get this, being AGAINST ant-discrimination laws. I’m dead serious. People can read his comments for themselves if they don’t believe me. He doesn’t live in the real world, at least the world most of the rest of us live in. And yet proceeds to lecture people who know better on why his views are Christ-like. He reminds me of a guy who never played American football but tries to tell Bill Belichick how to coach the New England Patriots.

  • TS (unami)

    Josh said,

    “1. I don’t oppose gay marriage. I just don’t think the government should be in the business of determining who is and who isn’t married.”

    So, are you ready to turn in *your* legal marriage license?

  • $144948586

    Absolutely, but only on condotion they stop favoring the marriage through the tax system.

  • $144948586

    Well a girl was molested by a trans person in one, and the rule has been abused by predators. It’s not practical to add extra risk to rhe most vulnerable.

  • TS (unami)

    Wait, what?
    Are you married?
    You’ll give up your marriage license and all of the other rights for married couples?

  • $144948586

    “Are you married?”
    Yes.

    “You’ll give up your marriage license and all of the other rights for married couples?”
    Marriage is a covenant between us and God, the government “say so” is merely to not be unfairly harassed by the State because they have declared us single and undeserving of certain civil rights like tax discounts.
    So, yes, I’d give up my fascist declaration we call a marriage license.

  • TS (unami)

    You clearly don’t understand the civil rights extended to married couples. Health Care choices, visitation, child care and custody, decisions about end of life and internment — and more, *not* just “taxes”!

    You need to talk to an attorney.

  • $144948586

    “You clearly don’t understand the civil rights extended to married couples.”
    I understand that it’s unfair treatment under the law, plain and simple.
    Call it what you want, but fair it is not.

  • TS (unami)

    Talk to a civil rights attorney.

  • $144948586

    About what?

  • Dave-n-TN

    Ron: I have been a quiet observer of the discussion you, Bones, Al, and many others have been trying to have with Josh. I wanted to send you a private message, but found that was not possible via Patheos.

    I just wanted to say I admire your desire to have a true conversation with Josh – in spite of the horrible. judgemental, and belligerent things he has said directly to each of you. You have lasted longer in a ‘dead end’ conversation much longer than I would have tolerated. It is very difficult to have such conversation with someone completely unwilling to show any signs of empathy towards others or understand where someone else may be sitting in thier life. I believe the book says, “come, let us reason together” .. however when one party has no desire to enter into a reasonable conversation and only thinks he has been led to this group in order to correct everyone else (and not think about his own position or learn about others) there can be no reasonable conversation and then there is no point.

    I pray you have not been discouraged by this past month’s interactions with this person. You and many others provide a constant challenge & refreshing viewpoint for me in understanding life and the many aspects/beliefs of religion.

  • Ron McPherson

    Bless you Dave. Thank you so much!

  • Bones

    Lol all of of a sudden the libertarian wants to police toilets.

    Why am I not surprised.

  • Bones

    I’m sure in college he thinks he’s quite the intellectual.

  • Ron McPherson

    I have an idea. Let’s turn all public restrooms into pay toilets. Make them all capitalist ventures. Since capitalism cures all evils, child predator activity will magically disappear…or something like that.

  • $144948586

    “Lol all of of a sudden the libertarian wants to police toilets.”
    Again you’re dishonest. I never said anything about who is and who isn’t allowed in bathrooms.

    I’d prefer companies determine their own bathroom policy, and I’ll just go to the stores that don’t allow dudes in my daughter’s bathroom.

  • Ron McPherson

    He called me these things because to him I live in darkness lol.

  • Matthew

    Like what the crap?!?

  • Ron McPherson

    ; )

  • Matthew

    What if I have to go pee, but I don´t have any loose change … what then Ron??? :-)

  • Ron McPherson

    Well Matthew it’s like this. In a purely capitalist society, paying to pee will cost far more than a quarter. We’re talking greenbacks here. And since you would be filthy wealthy (cause everybody will be), loose change will no longer be a reality. There will be no such think as quarter toilets and nickel bumble gum. And because you will have hundreds of thousands of dollars to throw around, you can very easily put a hundred dollar bill in the lock to open up the stall, and you will never miss it nor worry that you’ve overpaid. Plus, since a capitalist society truly thrives in purely altruistic motives, you will be helping out the owner of the toilet, which ultimately makes everybody wealthier.

  • Bones

    That used to happen.

    Hence the saying I’ve got to spend a penny.

  • $144948586

    “He accused me of being a fascist, hypocrite, oppressor, authoritarian, and bigot because I would take a stand for black people rather than for racists.”
    What a liar.
    I didn’t call you these things because you’d “take a stand” for black people rather than racists; I called you these things because you’d oppress the racist for the sake of black people.
    You’re the one supporting unequal application of law at the point of violence.

  • $144948586

    “In a purely capitalist society, paying to pee will cost far more than a quarter. ”
    Why?

  • Ron McPherson

    “What a liar. I didn’t call you these things because you’d “take a stand” for black people rather than racists; I called you these things because you’d oppress the racist for the sake of black people.”

    A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

  • $144948586

    “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.”
    Thanks for you admission that oppression is OK with you.

  • $144948586

    “Make them all capitalist ventures.”
    So your natural supposition is that capitalists don’t make anything free?

  • Ron McPherson

    “Thanks for you admission that oppression is OK with you.”

    What a load of BS. People are free to read through this thread and draw their own conclusions where each of us stand.

    You live in a fantasy world where rationalization rules. You defend the actions of a racist by advocating that he has a right to kick the black kid out of his public business for no other reason than that he’s black. There is absolutely NOTHING about that that even remotely has the interest of the black kid here. It’s telling that you get more worked up over a racist being ‘oppressed’ than a minority. Somebody ain’t gonna be happy. Either it’s gonna be the racist, or the victim of his prejudice. You made it perfectly clear where you stand.

    I suppose you had no problem with Starbucks kicking the black guys out. To you, the company would have been perfectly within their rights to do it in your world.

    Earlier, you defended the actions of the hypothetical deli owner who wouldn’t serve a sandwich to a black kid by saying you’d make the sandwich for the black kid instead. By the way, where were you when Starbucks kicked the black guys out?

  • Ron McPherson

    AAARRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!

  • $144948586

    #Mind blown#
    Unequal treatment under the law is authoritarianism. It is fascism. It is oppression.

  • Ron McPherson

    #theguyisbuggingthehelloutofmepleasesomebodymakehimstop#

  • $144948586

    I know, it feels like that when you realize your oppression.
    Doesn’t believe he’s an oppressor, but asks someone to suppress me in the middle of honest conversation. #irony.

  • Ron McPherson

    In your world a black kid can get kicked out of a public business by a racist, but the kid is not a victim of oppression because he can just go somewhere else. No big deal. Good thing you’re not a minority. You take offense over just an Internet forum (cause I won’t continue playing your game going on two weeks now). You lost me when you claimed my employees were akin to mobsters, that anti-discrimination laws were akin to rape, and that taxation was akin to slavery. So “honest conversation” kinda fell by the wayside a while back.

  • $144948586

    “In your world a black kid can get kicked out of a public business by a racist, but the kid is not a victim of oppression because he can just go somewhere else.”
    By definition, this is not oppression.

    “No big deal.”
    I never said this.

  • Ron McPherson

    Josh says: “Doesn’t believe he’s an oppressor, but asks someone to suppress me in the middle of honest conversation. #irony.“”

    So Josh must be the victim of oppression because someone won’t play his little game on an Internet forum.

    Josh says: “By definition, this (a black kid being discriminated against by getting kicked out of a place of business by a racist) is not oppression.”

    LOL. I rest my case!

  • $144948586

    “So Josh must be the victim of oppression because someone won’t play his little game on an Internet forum.”
    I’m just going with your definition of oppression.

    You’re right, I wouldn’t be a victim of oppression, except in the case that you don’t own Disqus; I’d just be discriminated if Disqus were to block me. However, you’ve no right to silence me.
    Perhaps I should have said “[Ron] doesn’t believe it’s right to kick people out of places for being ‘the undesirable’, asks someone to suppress me. #irony” Does that suit you better?

  • Ron McPherson

    Um, you are aware that it was a joke right? That I have not contacted any moderators, as they would be the only ones who actually could “suppress” you. Gee, talk about drama, which is kinda #ironic for someone who is against anti-discrimination laws that would otherwise protect others.

  • $144948586

    “Gee, talk about drama, which is kinda #ironic for someone who is against anti-discrimination laws that would otherwise protect others.”
    What is ironic?

  • $144948586

    Yeah, I know.
    What the crap, dude thinks he’s Bill Belichick.

  • $144948586

    Honestly, I’d like Ron or you to explain to me why you presume capitalists would charge to pee.

  • $144948586

    Who do I not have empathy for?

  • $144948586
  • Ron McPherson

    Lol. So you read an article on the mismanagement of some government agencies, so by extension that must mean that all government agencies are fiscally irresponsible. That makes about as much sense as me posting articles about certain bankrupt companies in an effort to prove that all capitalist ventures could be better run by the government. Ever heard of the problems associated with binary thinking?

  • $144948586

    “so by extension that must mean that all government agencies are fiscally irresponsible.”
    No, it’s been proven time and again public sector jobs are, in general, more highly compensated than their private counterparts.
    https://www.govexec.com/pay-benefits/2017/04/overall-public-private-sector-compensation-gap-has-widened-cbo-finds/137324/

    Speaks once again to diseconomies of scale.

    “That makes about as much sense as me posting articles about certain
    bankrupt companies in an effort to prove that all capitalist ventures
    could be better run by the government.”
    Actually, it’s much different; in capitalist societies, companies often fail and are replaced by something more prudent and efficient if said companies do not adapt.

    In government, consumers don’t have this luxury, so people are just stuck suffering through an outmoded form of service–like public schools or the postal service. So when governments fail, people starve, are beheaded, or, the worst of all inefficiencies, the armies murder 150 million citizens.

    But I digress…

    We’ll just let yet another fiscally irresponsible socialist democrat city, state, or federal government ruin the economies of their dominion–they’ll all flock here to Texas like they (and their jobs) currently are and repeat the cycle until California turns red.

  • Bones

    Poor Rick….

    So in need of attention….

    https://youtu.be/Shk8HawnCTs

  • $144948586

    Hi Ron, here’s another twizzler for ya:
    You’ve said you have no right, as a business, to refuse service to a person just because they’re black.
    Do you have the right, as a business, to refuse to buy your supplies from a person just because they’re black?

  • Bones

    He was too busy policing toilets.

    Because he’s a libertarian…..

  • TJ the Good

    Wouldn’t it be funny if your kids are slaughtered in the next mass shooting? I know I’d laugh!

  • Dave-n-TN

    My comment was not directed to you, but REALLY? After all you have said in this post? (If you might want to re read your many comments with a different point of view other than your seemingly privileged position, then you might start to understand.)

    I think you may deserve the “Here’s your sign” for today …

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/130e9d39b308a96e3417137cb772c1974d31656f0dd395c4ad16d0486760837b.jpg

  • $144948586

    “My comment was not directed to you, but REALLY? After all you have said in this post?”
    No, it was just about me as if that is better than being upfront.
    Absolutely, really. No one’s talked to me about whom I had empathy for.

    I appreciate your appeal to me “having privilege” because you’re hoping to trump my arguments with some comment about supremacy…it’s highly marginalizing.

    “re read your many comments with a different point of view other than your seemingly privileged position, then you might start to understand.”
    Or perhaps you could start by understanding the practicality that it doesn’t matter why you oppress (for the sake of ‘justice’ or ‘righteousness’); it’s still oppression, unjust and unrighteous.

  • D.M.S.

    Politically, I might become a libertarian, if that’s the way that they believe.

  • D.M.S.

    Neither is yours…..

  • Virginia Bemis

    I would give all these young people extra credit for civics and government.

  • $144948586

    “And in my opinion your many comments on this post show nothing similar to these definitions and thus, the conclusion, that you have no empathy for others different from yourself.”
    You know, I had a girl break my heart once. Guess what, my friends who could understand, they could feel, my pain were there for me. But you know what they won’t let me do? Call, text, e-mail, communicate with her, etc.

    You see, these guys were expressing empathy.

    But, they’re also looking out for my best interests even if it meant shattering any illusions I had of what I thought was “better”.

    What Ron expresses is not just empathy.
    What I express is not “not empathy”.
    What Ron expresses, that you defend, that everyone in this forum defends, is the use of force as if it is more righteous: it is “just war theory”.
    It’s still oppressive, and my refusal to be oppressive for someone else’s sake is not a lack of empathy. To accuse it as otherwise is to be a liar.

    You think, “It’s better to ban discrimination by forcing someone to serve a sandwich.” I’ll tell you, “It’s still slavery for righteousness’ sake.”

    And I’m proud of my boys, and delighted, because they stood in the way of me chasing false hopes. And I fell in love years later with my wife and we have 3 beautiful kids who love to be hugged and kissed.

    Sorry if I sound cold to you, but it’s primarily your illusion; I turn cold when person’s like Bones hurl derision or someone *ehem* passively insults me.

    Good for you and your supremacy.

  • Bones
  • $144948586

    If you say so.

  • $144948586

    At least Bones admits that he needs the state to tell him that he must help the lame and dying.

  • Dave-n-TN

    Sorry for you that you end your comment with an insult towards others. Hope you have a blessed life and find peace.

  • Dave-n-TN

    And after some thought regarding your comment I see where you are … empathy is all about how it benefits you per the examples you provided. (And you never really answered my question.) I see that you have you missed the boat on being human, presenting humanity, and having compassion for others. I truly am sorry for you and how you perceive life. (And no, I did not share my life and experiences with you to show supremacy – that is your illusion and further proves my point that you have no empathy for others.)

  • Bones
  • Bones
  • Bones
  • Ron McPherson

    LOL!!!