well the current grading/school system is about the shittiest way ever devised of measure intelligence, interest in scholarship and potential for success
well the current grading/school system is about the shittiest way ever devised of measure intelligence, interest in scholarship and potential for success
not to mention the awful curriculum
plus the entire operation of school is still set up to prepare the students for work in a factory, which businesses asked the government to do a century ago. even though now all the factory jobs are offshored lol
After scanning this topic over something caught my eye.
Bull. Fucking. Shit.The rights of society as a whole are more important than the rights of a single man.
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects." - Time Enough For Love, by Robert Heinlein
Governments prove democracy gets very litte done. Dictatorships get results. I doubt a democratic government could repair an economy as fast as Hitler (yes, he was an extremely evil man, but you cannot deny that Germany's economy was pulled out of a hole by him).
Ever heard of Franklin D. Roosevelt?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt
/eyeroll
The greatest Head of State of the post-Industrial Revolution.
We ignored America in History. It came in with the Cold War, but we never looked at it properlyAnd I'll read that later.
I don't see how England could possibly review World War II while ignoring America, considering without America they would be part of the Soviet Union(along with the rest of western europe)
We looked at how America helped us out, but we didn't do a proper "Which president what policies" thing. We did that with Germany. 'Twas interesting.
"If you know all the facts you will see that there are two sides to every argument and that both sides are correct. Therefore the only way to have an opinion is to not have all the facts to hand."
I doubt you know everything either, and yet you say the welfare system is better.
If it weren't for Russia, England would have been taken over by the Germans. If not for America, England would have been taken over by the Soviets after they beat Germany. England should have big statues of Stalin and FDR all over the place.
That only applies to things like war, in some cases. It doesn't apply to watching people starve to death because they weren't born independently wealthy.Originally Posted by The Editor
If I were insanely rich I would still want to feed starving kids, all across the world.
If I had so much money that the concept of money was trivialized, I would still want to provide children in tropical countries with mosquito nets to prevent them from dying of malaria.
Seeing both sides of the situation doesn't make you less of a selfish prick, it just makes me despise you more for thinking its okay to let kids die because their parents lost their job.
See the poor side of this, imagine for a minute that you got laid off from your job and your kids didnt have enough to eat. Though you looked for work EVERY DAY you couldnt find another job because the market was flooded with potentials due to the fact that your factory also fired 300 other people. It happens all the time. Factories ship the jobs off to china and americans lose their jobs. Everyone suffers in these situations, but especially the children.
Why should kids have to become malnourished because some corporate jackass found a way to save money by making chinese people work for 15 cents an hour.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4Q47...eature=related
A classic retelling of British courage. They ran through the briars and they ran through brambles, they ran through the bushes where a rabbit couldn't go. They RAN so fast the hounds couldn't catch them.
All your people can do is repress, and run. You don't learn an entire retelling of history, you learn an edited version to make yourself appear more than you are.
I have lost what little respect I had for the British people.
For fuck's sake lady, what part of "put them into care" is lost on you!?
Because that is a problem too.
Being forcefully taken from a home is more tramatic than actually helping them. Not only that, it would also be more expensive and in the end raise your taxes more. Moron.
Stop being a stuck-up ignorant prick and just quit like you said you would.
If welfare was cut then the money would go into the care system. And death is worse than care.
The Editor would you please run down the entirely of your political, economic, ethical, and social opinions.
In the care system... This would require
1.) facilities - Very costly to build surely
2.) caregivers
3.) pension plans and health insurance provided to said caregivers
All that as opposed to giving some underprivilaged children 3 square meals a day... How much would those meals cost? Maybe 12$...
How much would facilities, plus hourly wages to caregivers cost? CONSIDERABLY MORE.
YOU FUCKING TWIT.
You don't actually think.
I hope one day you are poor, and that the only solution anyone can find is to take your children away. Blood of your blood, heart of your heart, and send them into an institution where they won't be properly loved or cared for instead of providing temporary monetary relief.
You have no idea what a child means to their parent. I think if anyone tried to take my son I would kill them with my hands and teeth. I would rip them apart. Nothing would remain but bloody shred and bones.
Taking children away from their families is NO SOLUTION. It would be a money sink and only produce traumatized institutionalized psychotic adults unable to function properly in society.
You have no real idea what life is about, you have no right to voice such ignorant selfish greedy opinions.
What don't you understand about the fact that it would be more expensive. Even with that welfare cut out, it would still cost more. Besides, earlier you already admitted that there are legitimate uses for welfare. You couldn't cut welfare all that much so it would only raise those taxes more.
And care is worse than welfare.
You realize that not everyone who gets onto those foster parent lists are better than the situations your taking them from.
Exactly.
True, I don't know. Then again, I don't know that you do know, and I was never one to follow the principle of testimony anyway, so I guess that's that.
The Editor, You're up against three different people who have experenced the real world first hand from all different views of the lower class. We all know what we're talking about because we've actually been there. So I do know.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
