[ale] Corporate taxes...

[James S. Cochrane]

At 12:21 PM 11/13/02 -0500, F. Grant Robertson wrote:
>The welfare of our future generations is entirely dependant upon the
>debt load we leave them, and the preservation of our constitution.
>
>And as for your argument on buying luxury cars.. I happen to own a BMW,
>so, good choice.  I'm all for federal funding of education, I think it's
>possibly the only thing our founding fathers overlooked, and had they
>actually ventured into the issue, I think it's apparent that their
>solution would have been very different than our current one. This is
>precisely why I support the dissolution of the department of education,
>and the institution of school choice through educational credits and
>vouchers.  Only through the reinstitution of competition in our
>educational system will we ever be able to compete and win on a global
>scale. As it stands, the legislative branch of government are in
>ultimate control of what we are taught. I think you should be able to
>realize that absolute power corrupts absolutely and, to that end our
>government is doing an inadequate job of eduacating our population. You
>yourself said you do not have the grasp of economic science needed to
>debate my points, and this is a perfect example. civics, economics, and
>history are all being removed from the education of our children, who
>are also our next crop of voters. Without a proper understadning of the
>forces they control how are they ever to be expected to make the proper
>choices as an electorate and therfore provide the guidance for our
>continued success?

Actually, I would argue that government (particularly Federal government) 
involvement in public education was properly left OUT of the 
Constitution.  With government schools you have government bureaucrats and 
politicians involved in how schools are run and what children are taught, 
including the current trend of teaching the political and economic 
viewpoints of those who are in power.  Which is why you see certain 
activist groups actively encouraging their members to enter the teaching 
profession so they can influence future voters at an early age.  The actual 
information content of textbooks is going down, and those who graduate from 
high school today have a MUCH lower standard of education than those who 
graduated in 1850.  Look at the quality of the letters home from soldiers 
during the War of Northern Aggression and compare those to papers written 
by current high school (hell, some college) graduates.  There's a REASON 
homeschooled kids are doing much better than those in public schools, and 
it's evident as early as 1st grade.  I was one of many kids who got through 
high school in spite of the system, not due to it.  And I got my rear end 
kicked at Tech as a result, but I managed to get through Tech as well.  But 
not in my original major, and not with a stellar GPA.

James


>-Grant
>
>P.s., Sorry, I thought I was done but, government education is a major
>hotbutton of mine..  for obvious reasons explained above.
>
>P.p.s I really will shut up now :)
>
>
>On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 11:51, Joseph A Knapka wrote:
> > Jonathan Glass wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 11:36, Kilroy, Chris wrote:
> > >
> > >>->More money in federal income
> > >>->directly translates to less free capital in the open economy.
> > >>
> > >>not necessarily.  the only time i was ever in a business class in my 
> life (1991), the government was
> > >>actually contributing roughly 33% of the GDP through employment,
> > >
> > > grants, etc.  depending on the way in which revenue is shifted and
> > > spending adjusted in federal budgets, does not ensure that more net GDP
> > > flows into the economy.  for instance if taxes are lowered and as such
> > > less federal jobs exist, that doesnt necessarily result in an
> > > improvement to the economy.
> > >
> > >
> > > BUT, the Gov't gets its money from the income earners, and spends it
> > > less efficiently than that income earner would.
> >
> > What does that mean, exactly? Is it "more efficient" for me to buy
> > a BMW, or for that $40K to be spent on improving the quality of
> > education at a public school? I think it depends on your
> > time horizon. Most individuals will use their money for their
> > personal comfort and gain, and damn the long-term consequences.
> > Ideally, the government would make investments with a longer
> > horizon, though I admit we're far from that ideal at present -
> > and after all, the government is made up of individuals, but
> > that's why we have rules and institutions that govern matters
> > at a level higher than that of the individual.
> >
> > And this argument is not entirely about economics. It may be
> > that Mr Robertson is 100% correct on the economic issues -
> > I don't know enough about economics yet to say. But there
> > are a great many intangibles, such as general quality of
> > life, the welfare of our grandchildren and their descendants,
> > etc, that must be considered in order to make *wise*
> > decisions.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > -- Joe
> >
> >
> > ---
> > This message has been sent through the ALE general discussion list.
> > See http://www.ale.org/mailing-lists.shtml for more info. Problems 
> should be
> > sent to listmaster at ale dot org.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>---
>This message has been sent through the ALE general discussion list.
>See http://www.ale.org/mailing-lists.shtml for more info. Problems should be
>sent to listmaster at ale dot org.



---
This message has been sent through the ALE general discussion list.
See http://www.ale.org/mailing-lists.shtml for more info. Problems should be 
sent to listmaster at ale dot org.