[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: OT: Politics [Was:Social Contract]



Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Umm.  You do realize that not all private schools are Christian,
correct?  There are Jewish, Muslim, and yes even secular private
schools.  If there are not enough secular private schools now, I'm sure
that a market would open up for them if public education was abolished.

Besides, why is it my job to *guarantee* that you can send your children
to school for free?  If you can't afford to raise them, then don't have
them.  Really, why should I pay taxes for education my entire life when
kids only go to school for 12-16 years?

Well, I can't speak for other States, but in Texas, it is a
"Right" protected by the Constitution. YMMV

Besides, my contempt of public education has little to do with my
religious beliefs and more to do with the utterly dismal quality of them.

Yes. All three of my children were home schooled. One of them is
studying to be an MD at the moment, another is a lead electrician,
and the third is still not sure what she wants to do.


If you can, read the book.  If not, watch the debate that Neal Boortz
had with Michael Graetz:

I need to read my copy. One of my sisters got me one.

http://www.booktv.org/Feature/index.asp?schedid=412&segid=6995

Graetz has some good points, but I still think that the FairTax is the
way to go.

I prefer sales taxes to consumption taxes for a few reasons:

	sales taxes are more visible and easier to compute and track
	consumption taxes result in lots more paperwork for people
		who perform services, like repairmen and installers

I think we need to *repeal* some taxes. For example, there was a
Temporary Emergency Luxury Tax passed to fund the Spanish American War,
and which you can still see on your long distance telephone bill.

Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!



Reply to: