Mumia W wrote: > > Your quotes don't help your argument for two reasons. You're not > comparing public to private, and the people making those statements > don't begin to envision what society would be like without public > schooling. > You mean that things would be better? > This is another part of the Right Wing mantra: "It doesn't outperform > the private sector, so it should be scrapped." > The problem is that in both social security and education there is *no* incentive to perform *at all*. Look at the Postal Service for a good example of a government agency that knows how to perform. Even that is not the best example, because they are hampered by the fact that congress *will not* let them turn a profit. > Where both Social Security and public education are concerned, the > purpose is *not* to outperform the private sector. If they tried to do > that, the private companies would scream bloody murder. > Please look at the Postal Service example again. They outperform all their competitors and the competitors are still there. > The purpose of the public programs is to ensure that *something* is > there for the middle class and poor. It doesn't have to be gold-plated. > Except that I don't want to live in a welfare state, which is essentially what you are advocating. > The purpose of public education is to prevent the formation of a sharp, > two-class system, where an elite class understands how the society is > run, and everyone else knows so little that they have to accept the > decisions of the elite. > Hate to break it to you, but that is how things are right now. > When this happens, it is absolutely guaranteed that the elite will > structure society so that they will forever be the elite, and no one > else will ever be given the opportunity to understand how the society is > run or why it's run the way it is. > Again, how things are now. > It would be like Medieval times, where an Aristocracy ruled, and the > peasants, by both education and law, had no choice but to accept their > decisions. A system like this can last 500 or a thousand years. > > The purpose of public education was to ensure that this could never > happen again. > No. The purpose of public education *was* to ensure that the most disadvantaged, who could not afford a private education, could get an education. It has mushroomed into the mess we have now. > The purpose of public education in America, was to destroy the power of > the old aristocracy of the South, and to fertilize the formation of a > new white middle class that would never allow themselves to be dominated > by an elite group of plantation owners ever again. (It worked). > > The purpose of public education is not to compete directly against > private education. It is to teach the masses how to see it when their > rulers are about to give them the big shaft. It worked. In 2004, at > least 55 million Americans saw the big shaft coming and tried to stop it. Please go read the Communist Manifesto and see why Marx said it was a requirement that the state control education in order to have a Communist society. -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature