Member of the Month

GayWolf420
June, 2025

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Ron Paul Revolution!

profile picture
ImNotARacist
Posts: 5136 - Karma: -1,030
Click for larger image





WATCH THIS ONE


post why you love him.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
jaythemans
Posts: 243 - Karma: 57
Evolution is a fact.
It is natural selection (the mechanisms of evolution) that is the theory. Can't believe your ignorance.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
papermache
Posts: 1097 - Karma: 616
couldn't agree with woozy more. if you haven't watch the documentary "waiting for superman" it comprehensively addresses why our education system is so fucked up and how most of that has to do with beuracracy and union interference to change.

Anyways bout to see ron paul speak in person in about an hour from now. stoked!
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Zimmerman
Posts: 6992 - Karma: 1,021
I actually agree with almost all of that! Cheers.

You still haven't answered how a private system would work though. Damn this is taking forever....
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
do.a.rodeo
Posts: 270 - Karma: -30
1. You pay 'cash money' to an institution. You can choose among many unique schools because they're no longer a government entity spewing the same generic crap.
2. You receive schooling catered to your tastes, as you would with any other good or service.

Hope that cleared it up.


13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Tdevil
Posts: 15 - Karma: 10
Ron Paul is not gonna win
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
ImNotARacist
Posts: 5136 - Karma: -1,030
Your mom will give me a blow job.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
wasatch_rat
Posts: 1774 - Karma: 3,012
granted i have only read the last page of this thread, but to me its reminiscent of every conversation i've had or heard with a libertarian. i'm on board for a long time, but then i'm just left to assume that the laws of economics will fix all problems, and i am supremely skeptical of that.

like really, we have people advocating full privatization in education? have you ever been to a country that does that? doesn't it seem incredibly obvious that this will provide education relative to income level, and leave our socio-economic ladder even more rigid than it already is? education is fucked in this country, but i do not see privatization being a favorable answer.

or getting rid of the EPA? you really think the federal government has no place in regulating pollution? its an externality, and a very good reason for the government to intervene in the market. individual states don't have the resources to combat rampant destruction of the environment, and would we really want all our states being held to different standards on pollution?

take a political theory course, they're called positive freedoms
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
uosdwiSrjewoH
Posts: 4220 - Karma: 122
not even going to try to connect this, you know that it's there, but i'm pretty interested in evolution, have researched it pretty thoroughly and know more about it than most of the people in the world, and my sister is a diehard creationist, in a family and social group in which most people are very neutral on the subject. i don't like this fact, it's pretty unfortunate.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Zimmerman
Posts: 6992 - Karma: 1,021

See woozy i like most of that but it seems unrealistic. I have even less faith that corporate-run education would compete to produce the best students, rather than simply cut costs at the expense of the child. In essence i can't support for-profit education. Very interesting debate though.

13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
1337
Posts: 31080 - Karma: 29,700
without some form of national scholastic standard though, some states would have very little to do with their education system and would lead to even lower test scores/performance/graduate rates.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
PJS.
Posts: 11943 - Karma: 900
Its better than the main motivation being profit.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
PhaedeD
Posts: 11499 - Karma: 342
doesnt dealing with uneducated idiots get fucking annoying??

I dont even post in these threads anymore, the kids in here arguing are exactly what is wrong with our country.

1337 is showing is true stupidity right now.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
ImNotARacist
Posts: 5136 - Karma: -1,030
You guys are so ignorant.


Fuck trying to make profit, that shit is risky. Instead develop a department and take a lot more money than you need from people who think they need the department. Department of education.
That graph should speak for itself ya goomba. Kids are just as dumb as they were before but we are spending 10 times as much money, literally stealing it for a lost cause, a plan that failed, but we still think the public school systems are fine.




Who fucking cares if private schools make a little profit. As long as their main focus is a good, clean, unbiased education that all that matters right? If that isn't the schools focus and the price is too high you won't go there, and because the system allows for only private schools their will be a lot to choose from, supply and demand takes action, probably wont have ridiculous costs because they are going to have to compete with one another.


Instead you drop your kid off and the local public school and take what you get.



13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
PhaedeD
Posts: 11499 - Karma: 342
sounds like the drug war.... spend money and to lose it! YAAHHHH AMMURRIICCAA
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Dr.Dickless
Posts: 2620 - Karma: 1,392
Ron Paul is an ideological candidate who has remained consistent for the last like ten years, that's amazing for a politician. He seems moral, he has radical and effective ideas for reducing the national debt, and I like many of his policies; but I wont be voting for him for one simple reason.

The president doesnt have absolute power. Most of the positive things Ron Paul is claiming to be able to fix arent even in the power of the executive branch, the legislature has the power to declare war, allocate funds, levy taxes, and the legislative and judicial branches must approve almost every presidential act.

Ron Paul has voted against the majority more than ninety percent of the time in congress. He cannot be an effective leader because he wont be able to do anything as president, he will disagree and veto everything that congress does, and he will be blocked at every turn by the rest of the government.
The president needs to be an ambassador to congress, and most congressmen and women don't like Paul because hes not a team player

I will probably end up voting for Obama, he hasn't fucked anything up too bad
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
ImNotARacist
Posts: 5136 - Karma: -1,030
Ron Paul “The American people are sick and tired of the wars going on over there, we are going broke fighting these wars that are not legitimate in that we were not attacked, they were not declared, and the American people in their majority want us out of there,”

Mit Romney "We must not allow Iran to have nuclear weapon…If I’m president, that will not happen." "He's also failed to communicate that military options are on the table and in fact in our hand." "I will have those military options, I will take those crippling sanctions and put them into place, and I will speak out to the Iranian people of the peril of them becoming nuclear. It's pretty straight-forward in my view,”

Sounds like Romney Can't wait to get his hands on a military.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
ImNotARacist
Posts: 5136 - Karma: -1,030
ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME!?!?!


The president is just another to "check and balance" our government. Not be a team player.


We need a president with a backbone, one that has the balls to say no. Paul, as you said, votes against the majority 90% of the time. Thank God someone is because 90% of the time this country is making bad decisions.



So our financial outlook in the USA is in shambles right now, obviously the team isn't doing a very good job. In fact, I would say that our government right now is doing extremely poor compared to later years.


But your going to vote for Obama and keep it how it is... Because, like you said, Hes a team player, playing on a team that is going the wrong way.





13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
skijunkiedtm
Posts: 9229 - Karma: 61
Wont vote for him because he can't do everything, so you wont even give him a chance to do anything?

If he were elected that would show a tremendous shift in the voice of the people, who the rest of the government must listen to because we are the reason they exist. "Consent of the Governed."

13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Zimmerman
Posts: 6992 - Karma: 1,021
Woozy, you will never understand my view here and it is obvious, but it's okay, you win because you can dumb it down and simplify it, then ignore my good points and fail to support yours. I think I've done all I can before we turn this into a big circle.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
ImNotARacist
Posts: 5136 - Karma: -1,030
Fuck off. Go talk about education somewhere else ya kook.


We spend too much money o a system that has been producing the same results for years.

It needs to change.


End of discussion.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Zimmerman
Posts: 6992 - Karma: 1,021
It's funny because you just agreed with my main point....
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
ImNotARacist
Posts: 5136 - Karma: -1,030
I know. You both agree with that point. Thats my point.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Italian.Stallion
Posts: 564 - Karma: 101
average private school tuition in 2007-2008 (maybe you have more current data?): $8549
average non sectarian school tuition in 2007-2008: $17,316

according to: http://www.capenet.org/facts.html

United States spending per school aged child: $7743

according to: http://mat.usc.edu/u-s-education-versus-the-world-infographic/


13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
~~~~~~~~
Posts: 2345 - Karma: 2,104
like you said, schools don't teach economics...
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Italian.Stallion
Posts: 564 - Karma: 101
yeah prices would totally drop $14,000, and the poor would totally be able to afford $3000 tuitions because nonprofit organizations would totally be able to help the poor! How very realistic of you! Sorry, but that would not happen in real life. Privatizing education would be a huge FUCK YOU to the lower class and would further deepen the chasm between the rich and the poor.

Oh and who should I believe for the most recent spending figure? A 2009 statistic of Bill Walker or a 2011 statistic of the University of Southern California...hmmm that's hard.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
nacho.steez
Posts: 435 - Karma: 137
i wonder who OP is voting for.. prolly mitt romney
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Italian.Stallion
Posts: 564 - Karma: 101
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=66

Ok, I didn't really find that stat in your article (I skimmed it and didn't see anything), but I found that. So you are probably right. $11000 is still less than $17000 tuition.

As for the poor and education, I'm sure you have your "logic." I have a paper to write, goodbye.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
PJS.
Posts: 11943 - Karma: 900
You used an example that was not related to the point I was getting at. The Department of Educations goal (in an ideal world, even if it isn't now) is to create and maintain the best national school system possible. A private companies goal is to make money. I'm simply worried that with that ulterior motive, students might suffer. Hit me with some studies and a long winded answer explaining why you're right and I am conclusively the most idiotic person on earth.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
wasatch_rat
Posts: 1774 - Karma: 3,012
i'm still waiting for a wall of data from woozy responding to my questions.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Amadeus.
Posts: 3050 - Karma: 383
The ron paul revolution! picking up steam with primary results such as 5 and 8 percent!
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Zimmerman
Posts: 6992 - Karma: 1,021
Except most people who describe themselves as libertarian don't actually think that way.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
PJS.
Posts: 11943 - Karma: 900
prove that.

as for the other paragraphs, you generalize the public as all being in the same situation. the way it is now, private schools are populated largely by people who choose to go to private school, and can afford it. if public school is eliminated, what happens to the kid whos parents don't make enough for a nice school? would they be forced to send him to a cheaper school that is worse than the average public school now? or would they magically make it into a school with the nicest facilities and the best teachers?

you are as paranoid about government as you claim everyone who disagrees with you is about companies.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Zimmerman
Posts: 6992 - Karma: 1,021
thank you
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
wasatch_rat
Posts: 1774 - Karma: 3,012
...and yet ron paul wants to get rid of the EPA, possibly the biggest actor and enforcer in environmental policy. perhaps its unfair to assume ron paul = libertarians and libertarians = ron paul, but he is definitely the loudest voice from that camp. honestly my biggest gripe with ron paul is his stance on the EPA, over which he would have tremendous power if he were president.

oh and i like how you act like i don't understand the very concepts that i bring up. like seriously what concept is it that you think i'm not grasping there? i can bet that i have studied a lot more political theory and environmental policy than you and i would appreciate a bit of a more respectful tone.

and honestly i don't give a shit if you copy and paste an old answer, because i'm not going through the whole thread, i have real political science homework to do. i think everyone in this country agrees that the education system is fucked, but if you are honestly advocating full privatization (and i don't want to straw man you if you aren't) then i think you're crazy. if you simply want the federal government out of education, then thats something i can disagree with much more respectfully.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
PJS.
Posts: 11943 - Karma: 900
Then don't fucking claim that it does if you have no solid proof, only opinion. And you're acting like that shit is never taught. Maybe not in elementary school, hell even up to high school, but it is taught. Where did you go to school?


Again, you present government as an unrelenting force of pure evil, not even acknowledging that there is middle ground between the perfect government and fucking nazi germany.

How does it feel to think that 2.65 million people are out to get you?

13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
wasatch_rat
Posts: 1774 - Karma: 3,012
so the EPA isn't perfect, does that mean we are better off without it? and the EPA is extremely susceptible to the whims of the executive, so its a bit unfair to blame the agency itself for decisions that might be coming from the top.

the judicial branch does play a huge role in environmental policy and property rights, as it should, but you cannot ignore the expense inherent to the judicial branch, or it's even more significant lack of efficient enforcement ability. if you want government to be efficient and responsive, going through a lengthy lawsuit for every tiny environmental issue isn't what you want.

plus there are environmental issues that don't necessarily fall under the category of property rights.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
wasatch_rat
Posts: 1774 - Karma: 3,012
from a political point of view, it is a bit unfair to blame the agency itself when its members, goals, and actions are essentially dictated by the president. it would be like blaming the military for not responding to a natural disaster when the president didn't order them to.

look at the communities affected by fracking in colorado, arizona, and new mexico. the EPA filed a report to dick cheney which was conveyed to the president (both of whom came from the petroleum industry) which expressed concern that some chemicals used in fracking were getting into people's running water. the white house then advocated no further action, aside from further investigation which was delayed. now, is it fair to advocate getting rid of the EPA as an enforcement tool, just because they're hands were tied by the president? I think the EPA belongs in the federal government, and i would tend to vote in accordance with who i think can best utilize the EPA to protect the environment. i don't think ron paul advocating elimination of the EPA speaks to his ability to wisely use it, and i don't believe that all 50 states should be left to govern environmental enforcement regulations independently.

but go ahead, give me a realistic and better alternative to the EPA, i honestly would like to hear it.

13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
1337
Posts: 31080 - Karma: 29,700
it is, the EPA does a ton of shit that you probably have no idea about...
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Zimmerman
Posts: 6992 - Karma: 1,021
good luck getting this answer. his response will mainly consist of more irrelevant ways to make your view sound stupid, yet never explain what his is and why it would be better.

Also, look the fuck out if your view is a good idea but unrealistic. Apparently that means it's wrong.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
ImNotARacist
Posts: 5136 - Karma: -1,030
I'll kill you if you say that again.



Mitt wants to be president so that he can get our military. Then the LDS church can take over the world.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
BlackCupid
Posts: 1533 - Karma: 9
You a little angry there buddy?
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
BlackCupid
Posts: 1533 - Karma: 9
Read the post directly above you. Retard.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Zimmerman
Posts: 6992 - Karma: 1,021
that post was in no way related to me. nice try though!
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Zimmerman
Posts: 6992 - Karma: 1,021
no, that post by you was in response to someone else about the EPA....

no, i said both of those about one time compared to the amount i typed on my actual point, and I had a response. being that you're denying that, i withdraw from this "debate", if it could be called that.
13 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Italian.Stallion
Posts: 564 - Karma: 101
Can you explain how "court enforcement of property rights would work?" You have said this multiple times but have never been specific about it (unless I missed a post). Oh and wetlands are actually pretty important ecosystems which is why the EPA doesn't allow people to build on them.
13 years ago
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4); Currently it's 5:06PM