Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

No education - no personal responsibility

Expand Messages
  • Angelos
    If I understand it right the whole Libertarian philosophy is based on the principle of personal responsibility. We do not want the Government to tell us how to
    Message 1 of 4 , Jun 24, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      If I understand it right the whole Libertarian philosophy is based on
      the principle of personal responsibility. We do not want the
      Government to tell us how to run our lives. We want to be able to take
      risks and make mistakes.

      However, we can not reasonably expect personal responsibility from
      people who are not educated at least at a basic minimum.

      This is why providing FREE education is something that the community
      (or its representatives, i.e., local Government) needs to make
      available to everyone.

      This is why, although people like Thomas Jefferson and John Adams
      never advocated free Healthcare, or free pensions or free Housing for
      the poor, they DID advocate FREE excellent education for the poor.

      Some posters here keep mentioning the 1700s amd early 1800s as great
      examples of high literacy rates and lack of Government educational
      mandates. The same people, forget to mention that back then it was
      ILLEGAL to educate blacks. So 99% of ALL BLACKS were illiterate (or
      20% of the people living in the US at the time.

      Fortunately, today as a society most of us care about making sure that
      the underprivileged minorities get a basic free education
    • Bob Giramma
      In a libertarian society, with no government involvement in education, there will be free schooling for deserving children. Homeschooling, community
      Message 2 of 4 , Jun 24, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        In a libertarian society, with no government involvement in education, there will be free schooling for deserving children. Homeschooling, community collectives, volunteerism, corporate and individual donations, etc.

        Last year, heavily-taxes Americans gave over $300 billion to charity. Cut the government programs and the associated taxes, and there will be a lot more money available for individual charitable donations. There will also be more money available for investment, leading to better job opportunities for the poor.

        Also, consider that the end of the welfare state will motivate people to behave more responsibly. Perhaps poor men will learn to keep their zippers up, and poor women will keep their legs crossed. Bottom line: End the welfare state, and there will be fewer poor students needing free education.


        From: Angelos
        Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 2:26 PM
        To: Libertarian@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [Libertarian] No education - no personal responsibility


        If I understand it right the whole Libertarian philosophy is based on
        the principle of personal responsibility. We do not want the
        Government to tell us how to run our lives. We want to be able to take
        risks and make mistakes.

        However, we can not reasonably expect personal responsibility from
        people who are not educated at least at a basic minimum.

        This is why providing FREE education is something that the community
        (or its representatives, i.e., local Government) needs to make
        available to everyone.

        This is why, although people like Thomas Jefferson and John Adams
        never advocated free Healthcare, or free pensions or free Housing for
        the poor, they DID advocate FREE excellent education for the poor.

        Some posters here keep mentioning the 1700s amd early 1800s as great
        examples of high literacy rates and lack of Government educational
        mandates. The same people, forget to mention that back then it was
        ILLEGAL to educate blacks. So 99% of ALL BLACKS were illiterate (or
        20% of the people living in the US at the time.

        Fortunately, today as a society most of us care about making sure that
        the underprivileged minorities get a basic free education





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Sasan Sadat-Sharifi
        ... It doesn t take expensive education to teach a child The Golden Rule. That philosophy is ingrained by a combination of good parenting and life experience.
        Message 3 of 4 , Jun 24, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In Libertarian@yahoogroups.com, "Angelos" <kavouriadisez@...> wrote:

          > However, we can not reasonably expect personal responsibility from
          > people who are not educated at least at a basic minimum.
          >
          > This is why providing FREE education is something that the community
          > (or its representatives, i.e., local Government) needs to make
          > available to everyone.
          >

          It doesn't take expensive education to teach a child The Golden Rule.
          That philosophy is ingrained by a combination of good parenting and
          life experience.

          If anything, state education teaches exactly the opposite; that it's
          OK to initiate violence against others as long as it's for the good of
          the Collective.

          I have often seen you use the fact that education is expensive as an
          argument for Government schools. What you have failed to address is
          the reason WHY education is so expensive. It's the same reason why
          health care and gasoline are so expensive: STATE INTERVENTION.

          You have also argued that it would not be profitable to educate
          children who come from families that cannot afford to pay, but it
          doesn't have to be profitable. Charities are proof of that, and
          Compassion itself is a market force.

          Consider the following effects of the Free Market on education:

          --- Competition will keep costs lower and quality higher.
          --- Less taxes means more money to spend on education and charity.
          --- Schools would be focused on REAL education, not obedience to the
          State.

          I would also dispute the idea that's it's acceptable to subject
          children to the Lobotomy of State Education as long as the literacy
          rate of the Collective improves.

          When you quote Jefferson and the other "founders" it means absolutely
          nothing to me. They made the same mistake that you are making today,
          which is to believe that Government can "help". It only has the power
          to murder and enslave, and Public Education trains children to accept
          it as being necessary.

          ---Sasan
        • Wendie Slovak
          Well said. Wendie ... from ... community ... Rule. ... of ... absolutely ... power ... accept
          Message 4 of 4 , Jun 24, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            Well said.


            Wendie


            --- In Libertarian@yahoogroups.com, "Sasan Sadat-Sharifi"
            <sasan.sadat@...> wrote:
            >
            > --- In Libertarian@yahoogroups.com, "Angelos" <kavouriadisez@>
            wrote:
            >
            > > However, we can not reasonably expect personal responsibility
            from
            > > people who are not educated at least at a basic minimum.
            > >
            > > This is why providing FREE education is something that the
            community
            > > (or its representatives, i.e., local Government) needs to make
            > > available to everyone.
            > >
            >
            > It doesn't take expensive education to teach a child The Golden
            Rule.
            > That philosophy is ingrained by a combination of good parenting and
            > life experience.
            >
            > If anything, state education teaches exactly the opposite; that it's
            > OK to initiate violence against others as long as it's for the good
            of
            > the Collective.
            >
            > I have often seen you use the fact that education is expensive as an
            > argument for Government schools. What you have failed to address is
            > the reason WHY education is so expensive. It's the same reason why
            > health care and gasoline are so expensive: STATE INTERVENTION.
            >
            > You have also argued that it would not be profitable to educate
            > children who come from families that cannot afford to pay, but it
            > doesn't have to be profitable. Charities are proof of that, and
            > Compassion itself is a market force.
            >
            > Consider the following effects of the Free Market on education:
            >
            > --- Competition will keep costs lower and quality higher.
            > --- Less taxes means more money to spend on education and charity.
            > --- Schools would be focused on REAL education, not obedience to the
            > State.
            >
            > I would also dispute the idea that's it's acceptable to subject
            > children to the Lobotomy of State Education as long as the literacy
            > rate of the Collective improves.
            >
            > When you quote Jefferson and the other "founders" it means
            absolutely
            > nothing to me. They made the same mistake that you are making today,
            > which is to believe that Government can "help". It only has the
            power
            > to murder and enslave, and Public Education trains children to
            accept
            > it as being necessary.
            >
            > ---Sasan
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.