|
this is a broad political question. think about what your government does. do you think all of it is justified? would more be justified? nevermind corruption or "not doing things well"--just, if you assume it could do what it seems to think it should, what do you think of that?
i live in the u.s. what i see is public education, taxes, prisons, traffic enforcement, courts, voting, funding a bazillion miscellaneous things no one human will ever know...
taxes make sense, as a government is really the ruling violent force if you ask me, beating down all others who want to use violence--with violence. but they don't use pure violence, at least not mine--most of it is kind of "public relations"--appearing justified, and so on, through things like voting and the press.
so we need some taxes to fund that kind of thing, and also to remain stable in the world's scheme of violence, i.e. you cannot become an obviously worthwhile victim to attack.
beyond that, i'm not sure what a nation should do. maybe that's all they really do. education might be just another form of pacifying people.
a nation looks to survive, right? all that crap about justice and rights just seems like something to make people feel more secure than they are and more trusting than they would be if they were more critical--not that they need to be fooled--people are looking for something to trust.
|
Norway28262 Posts
I'm not sure if there's anything I think the government is unsuited for as long as it is the correct government, except for the media.
stuff like police and everything related, education and healthcare should always be only governmentially controlled imo.
|
i think if the government is okay to do education and, say, elections, voting, or whatever system they use, they may as well do "the media" too. i think the important thing is for governments to strive to reduce the advantage of the majority, so that you always have many opposing voices represented, and this goes for the economy too. a government isnt just to keep arbitrary rules in place, but to maintain variety in the players. that goes for political and economic entities. in this respect, i think the u.s. is really stifled--u have 2 plausible types of voices heard in most cases...
and in education, u usually have a little less than that, at least until university, and even then, the 1-voice tradition bleeds over for too long--it's what students are just accustomed to.
i like the u.s. being founded in response to flaws and anticipated flaws, and basically trying to not repeat them. but we really should repeat this process once more. everybody knows about current flaws to an obvious point.
|
Freedom is a myth. Anarchy is freedom. Nations are just players in a human drama. Was there a question or aim to those poorly articulated, though facinating, ideas?
|
Baltimore, USA22222 Posts
On January 21 2006 23:25 JoeUser wrote: Was there a question or aim to those poorly articulated, though facinating, ideas?
Apparently you've read any of mitsy's posts before. ^_^
|
On January 21 2006 23:26 EvilTeletubby wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2006 23:25 JoeUser wrote: Was there a question or aim to those poorly articulated, though facinating, ideas? Apparently you've read any of mitsy's posts before. ^_^ apparently you are one of the dozen fuckers who gets by bashing me OT for no reason constantly...
|
mitsy are you high? ur babbling makes no sense and sounds extremely like the south park hippie episode
|
Norway28262 Posts
what the hell, he didnt even use the word corporations
he might very well be high tho
|
what should the government forced you to do?
you must be high, this is horrible english and i doubt your not high or actually an american
|
Norway28262 Posts
I only meant that he didnt sound like one of those hippies from southpark because they're constantly talking about the corporations
he's probably high oh well that's never hurt anyone
|
The government should forced you to spell better.
|
drone can't you change the title so half the replies aren't like this:
On January 22 2006 00:12 SproutBoy wrote: The government should forced you to spell better.
On January 21 2006 23:50 Romanticide wrote: what should the government forced you to do?
you must be high, this is horrible english and i doubt your not high or actually an american
|
Sorry to make you cry Locked, really i am.
|
On January 22 2006 00:17 SproutBoy wrote: Sorry to make you cry Locked, really i am.
i'm writing in my livejournal about how much i hate you
|
the title makes as much of sense as mitsys posts on this thread. you change the titel poeple will just flame the horribly written comments by mitsy
|
On January 22 2006 00:00 Liquid`Drone wrote:I only meant that he didnt sound like one of those hippies from southpark because they're constantly talking about the corporations he's probably high oh well that's never hurt anyone
i meant to compare them to when the hippies are talking about the perfect society where like some1 bakes bread for other people, and some1 like protects the people. and stan and kyle just tell them that these already exist, and the hippies are stupid
|
Wow really, you call horrible english a typo?, its only a d for crist sake.
|
I don't think they would have bothered pointing out that small typo if his entire post didn't sound like (hate to be a sheep) the marijuana induced ramblings of a hippy. There is a worthwhile subject here it just hasn't been articuated well by stoner-boy.
On the topic, I think our government has the responsibilities to enforce the goals of our Constitution:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
|
Sydney2287 Posts
Natural Monopolies such as water. Something so fundamentally required by the population should never be controlled privately imo. Especially in countries such as Australia, where water being scarce enough (recent droughts) and the price is high enough already.
A private company controlling the water supply would be more likely to cut costs by reducing quality of the service, or to increase prices to increase profits, than a State-Owned Enterprise.
|
actualy, the post doesn't sound like it's written by someone who's high. sound's more like when you get drunk, and there is nothing more to drink so you get sad, decide that you're life is shit and it's all the goverment's fault. no?
|
On January 22 2006 00:30 Romanticide wrote: the title makes as much of sense as mitsys posts on this thread. you change the titel poeple will just flame the horribly written comments by mitsy Hahaha right you are.
|
|
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Government responsibilities: unite the land under common legislature, establish a judiciary, establish a police force, establish a military, provide a safety net (not hammock), and secure the blessings of liberty (ie: do these things and not one thing more)
|
I honestly believe that the government should force people to serve in the military for maybe 2-3 years after or before you begin colledge. It's not nessecary to go into combat either, you could choose your field, it's just that i think it would do alot of people good if they joined the military for awhile. Think about it...all those drug addicts and alcoholics, they could really kick the habit.
|
I think mitsy has run out of steam from his usual annoyances and has fallen to this low state of controversial drivel. I mean you can only expect the man to successfully enrage everyone for so long, we all have our slumps.
|
another OT snipe at me. if you don't want to discuss anything on topic, GTFO. if you want to talk about me so much, make a topic about me. and admit that you care way too much about your inadequate readings of me...
|
On January 22 2006 07:28 sith wrote: I honestly believe that the government should force people to serve in the military for maybe 2-3 years after or before you begin colledge. It's not nessecary to go into combat either, you could choose your field, it's just that i think it would do alot of people good if they joined the military for awhile. Think about it...all those drug addicts and alcoholics, they could really kick the habit.
The military isnt a social tool. It doesnt exist to help alcoholics, it exists defend U.S. interests. Forcing everyone to serve in the military would swell it to a ridiculously unneccessary size, and come at a huge financial cost. Not to mention having a non-volunteer force degrades morale because most of the people dont want to be there, and of course would be incredibly unpopular with the public. We're a country of 300 million people, surrounded by oceans, not a country of 6 million surrounded by 60 million enemies, like Israel. Forcing everyone to serve in the military is just a horrible idea for a country like the United States.
|
Norway28262 Posts
forcing everyone in the military is retarded unless you have a damn good reason
having some kind of mandatory community service for everyone isn't a bad idea though. I know that I greatly benefitted from the year I spent working (which I did instead of going to the army), and I think a vast majority of people would.
|
Taxes and bills for stuff is fine, the government just have to keep it on a fine line so that it does'nt cause an uproar or something. Like in the movie " Throbbin' Hood" the Sheriff of Naugthingham decided to put tax on pussy. I can tell you that did not fall in favor among throobin' and his merrymen.
|
On January 22 2006 08:24 Pistasj wrote: Taxes and bills for stuff is fine, the government just have to keep it on a fine line so that it does'nt cause an uproar or something. Like in the movie " Throbbin' Hood" the Sheriff of Naugthingham decided to put tax on pussy. I can tell you that did not fall in favor among throobin' and his merrymen. Haha, what the hell?
|
Do you really think that the Government should control education? Do you realize how narrow the education system is? The government supported education system's basis is over 1000 years old started in Prussia. It is a system designed so that the linguistic/verbal and mathematically skilled people to succeed, and if you dont have those skills(70% of the population doesnt) you are screwed. It is a system that takes interesting subjects, then breaks them down in to subjects as math english science. and if you dont find it enjoyable, the too bad for you. For those that learn by other means(physical, spatial, inter/intrapersonal) they do poorly. Not only this, but the education system does not prepare you for the real world after you leave. It does not teach you how to earn money and use money to the best of your abilities, instead it only trains you for one career that you hope to work for the rest of your life then retire on pension. But that does not work as well today as it used to. In this age, you have to relearn new skills to keep up with the world and keep being successful. These things are not taught to you in school, and most likely will not because it is a system designed to survive, not change.
10$ to anyone who can tell me what book i got this argument from.
|
On January 21 2006 23:50 Romanticide wrote: what should the government forced you to do?
you must be high, this is horrible english and i doubt your not high or actually an american
On January 22 2006 00:30 Romanticide wrote: the title makes as much of sense as mitsys posts on this thread. you change the titel poeple will just flame the horribly written comments by mitsy He's talking in retard so you understand him.
|
what should the government forced you to do?
They should force you to learn English.
|
I don't know but if it really told you that government supported education began over 1000 years ago in Prussia it's pretty off base.
The earliest instance of what may vaguely be called government-sponsored schools AFAIK were the Palace schools of the Merovingian and Carolinian monarchs. Modern government-sponsored education began no earlier than 200 years ago. 1000 years ago education was under the dominion of either the church or the monestaries, while appreticeship education began with the guilds. The University was founded around 900 years ago, in Italy, and was guild that gradually came under the influence of the church, and not of any central government.
And Prussia did not exist 1000 years ago -.-.
|
Moltke also reads history books as a side job.
|
Moltke, what's your major?
(If I were to guess, I'd say PoliSci)
|
|
I have trouble justifying giving a serious response to someone who can't even manage to use proper grammar in the topic title.
|
I HAVE TROUBLE JUSTIFYING A SERIOUS RESPONSE FROM AN OUT OF DATE NINTENDO SYSTEM
|
Norway28262 Posts
moltke is obviously a historian lol
how can you guess that wrongly
|
public education in the u.s. is a huge failure and a sad sad problem (talking about pre-university).
a lot of universities aren't much better, in general, but there is opportunity. there's opportunity everywhere, really, but the idea that it helps everyone who "cares" or "tries" is pretty much a lie. how many of you sat through over a decade of education on science, history, math, literature, and probably know, well, 5% of that? 1%? honestly, you know what you do, and that's it. and that's the problem. in the end you aren't doing very much besides spitting things back out on tests and night-before assignments. it is a competition, an obstacle course, not an education. now occasionally you get the exceptional teacher who manages to put you into a state of learning, and maybe you got 1 of those, maybe 5, maybe 0. the people who got lucky in that department always come and defend the education system, not realizing that if they had a few different teachers they would have got absolutely nothing out of the whole decades of shit.
i see people about to get their bachelors' who are pretty much incoherent when it comes to basic history, reading, writing, speaking. they memorized facts before a test and know a couple of formulas. they did some poor, worthless papers and got B's on them. that's what a bachelors means these days. so look at what you're turning in. that's what represents you, not the degree. the degree means you are willing to suffer and not ask questions, and just about everyone is getting them.
|
On January 22 2006 11:31 MoltkeWarding wrote: I don't know but if it really told you that government supported education began over 1000 years ago in Prussia it's pretty off base.
The earliest instance of what may vaguely be called government-sponsored schools AFAIK were the Palace schools of the Merovingian and Carolinian monarchs. Modern government-sponsored education began no earlier than 200 years ago. 1000 years ago education was under the dominion of either the church or the monestaries, while appreticeship education began with the guilds. The University was founded around 900 years ago, in Italy, and was guild that gradually came under the influence of the church, and not of any central government.
And Prussia did not exist 1000 years ago -.-.
Erm i'll check the numbers again, bad memory ><
|
Make all children finish eating up their vegetables before leaving the table. Mhm! Parents are usually much too lenient in this regard, and it's time for some proper government iron fist spanking!
|
Government should force you to give all your hard-earned money to the poor(er). No, really, I'm serious. Or am I? The government should not force you to give to charity (social security, disaster victims, etc) by using taxes.
|
On January 22 2006 15:56 mitsy wrote: public education in the u.s. is a huge failure and a sad sad problem (talking about pre-university).
a lot of universities aren't much better, in general, but there is opportunity. there's opportunity everywhere, really, but the idea that it helps everyone who "cares" or "tries" is pretty much a lie. how many of you sat through over a decade of education on science, history, math, literature, and probably know, well, 5% of that? 1%? honestly, you know what you do, and that's it. and that's the problem. in the end you aren't doing very much besides spitting things back out on tests and night-before assignments. it is a competition, an obstacle course, not an education. now occasionally you get the exceptional teacher who manages to put you into a state of learning, and maybe you got 1 of those, maybe 5, maybe 0. the people who got lucky in that department always come and defend the education system, not realizing that if they had a few different teachers they would have got absolutely nothing out of the whole decades of shit.
i see people about to get their bachelors' who are pretty much incoherent when it comes to basic history, reading, writing, speaking. they memorized facts before a test and know a couple of formulas. they did some poor, worthless papers and got B's on them. that's what a bachelors means these days. so look at what you're turning in. that's what represents you, not the degree. the degree means you are willing to suffer and not ask questions, and just about everyone is getting them.
It depends on what you are studying. I am studying one of those stupid engineering program and most of my classes are all exams. One quiz per week and a final or 2 midterm and a final. So you kind have to know the stuff. For the most part you are right. The eduaction systems are a complet bs. It's sole purpose to make us in to some mechnical parts for the machine.
|
On January 22 2006 17:43 inkblot wrote: Government should force you to give all your hard-earned money to the poor(er). No, really, I'm serious. Or am I? The government should not force you to give to charity (social security, disaster victims, etc) by using taxes.
I dont see how you can give the money to the poor directly. For example how do you know who need money the most? And how can you find the person and give money to him?
|
On January 22 2006 18:12 Person514cs wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2006 15:56 mitsy wrote: public education in the u.s. is a huge failure and a sad sad problem (talking about pre-university).
a lot of universities aren't much better, in general, but there is opportunity. there's opportunity everywhere, really, but the idea that it helps everyone who "cares" or "tries" is pretty much a lie. how many of you sat through over a decade of education on science, history, math, literature, and probably know, well, 5% of that? 1%? honestly, you know what you do, and that's it. and that's the problem. in the end you aren't doing very much besides spitting things back out on tests and night-before assignments. it is a competition, an obstacle course, not an education. now occasionally you get the exceptional teacher who manages to put you into a state of learning, and maybe you got 1 of those, maybe 5, maybe 0. the people who got lucky in that department always come and defend the education system, not realizing that if they had a few different teachers they would have got absolutely nothing out of the whole decades of shit.
i see people about to get their bachelors' who are pretty much incoherent when it comes to basic history, reading, writing, speaking. they memorized facts before a test and know a couple of formulas. they did some poor, worthless papers and got B's on them. that's what a bachelors means these days. so look at what you're turning in. that's what represents you, not the degree. the degree means you are willing to suffer and not ask questions, and just about everyone is getting them. It depends on what you are studying. I am studying one of those stupid engineering program and most of my classes are all exams. One quiz per week and a final or 2 midterm and a final. So you kind have to know the stuff. For the most part you are right. The eduaction systems are a complet bs. It's sole purpose to make us in to some mechnical parts for the machine.
Higher education (ie; college, grad school) is actually quite decent in the US. Mitsy; the fact that students retain nothing they learned is NOT due to the education system solely, but is also due to the actions of the students. Those smart and motivated enough to fully utilize the US educational system will benefit greatly.
Person514cs; The "eduaction systems" are not "complet bs" for those that apply themselves. In the US, you can go to any school you want if you're intelligent/ motivated enough and money is not an issue at all. One of the main reason the world powers are considered so is because of their advanced education systems. Some third world countries do not have any sort of education system and many of their universities cannot be entered without LARGE sums of money.
|
On January 22 2006 15:56 mitsy wrote: public education in the u.s. is a huge failure and a sad sad problem (talking about pre-university).
a lot of universities aren't much better, in general, but there is opportunity. there's opportunity everywhere, really, but the idea that it helps everyone who "cares" or "tries" is pretty much a lie. how many of you sat through over a decade of education on science, history, math, literature, and probably know, well, 5% of that? 1%? honestly, you know what you do, and that's it. and that's the problem. in the end you aren't doing very much besides spitting things back out on tests and night-before assignments. it is a competition, an obstacle course, not an education. now occasionally you get the exceptional teacher who manages to put you into a state of learning, and maybe you got 1 of those, maybe 5, maybe 0. the people who got lucky in that department always come and defend the education system, not realizing that if they had a few different teachers they would have got absolutely nothing out of the whole decades of shit.
i see people about to get their bachelors' who are pretty much incoherent when it comes to basic history, reading, writing, speaking. they memorized facts before a test and know a couple of formulas. they did some poor, worthless papers and got B's on them. that's what a bachelors means these days. so look at what you're turning in. that's what represents you, not the degree. the degree means you are willing to suffer and not ask questions, and just about everyone is getting them.
The degree means a lot actually. It means you completed a certain set of courses getting above a certain grade in your major and in some cases minor. It also means you have dedication, a good work ethic and are somewhat well rounded because you have to take generals. Talking about what the person actually learned on a personal level is a different issue. Some classes are introductory to just give you a general idea of the subject and some classes are more in depth requiring 2 or 3 prerequesites. In a graphics class my group and I developed a basic 3d game engine which took a month and a half to complete. I learned a lot from that and other projects like it throughout my college education.
|
On January 22 2006 18:33 oPtioNaLk wrote: Higher education (ie; college, grad school) is actually quite decent in the US. Mitsy; the fact that students retain nothing they learned is NOT due to the education system solely, but is also due to the actions of the students. Those smart and motivated enough to fully utilize the US educational system will benefit greatly. what a load
i said: u get a degree without getting anything out of it.
u said: well some students don't.
no shit.
Person514cs; The "eduaction systems" are not "complet bs" for those that apply themselves. In the US, you can go to any school you want if you're intelligent/ motivated enough and money is not an issue at all. One of the main reason the world powers are considered so is because of their advanced education systems. Some third world countries do not have any sort of education system and many of their universities cannot be entered without LARGE sums of money. and another
proof you don't know history
On January 22 2006 18:53 HowitZer wrote: The degree means a lot actually. It means you completed a certain set of courses getting above a certain grade in your major and in some cases minor. It also means you have dedication, a good work ethic and are somewhat well rounded because you have to take generals. Talking about what the person actually learned on a personal level is a different issue. Some classes are introductory to just give you a general idea of the subject and some classes are more in depth requiring 2 or 3 prerequesites. In a graphics class my group and I developed a basic 3d game engine which took a month and a half to complete. I learned a lot from that and other projects like it throughout my college education. and another
i said: u get a degree that proves nothing, classes mostly worthless
u said: well some students learn, and some classes are good sometimes
whoopy fricken shit.
|
|
|
|