Homestead mailing list

["clanSkeen" <sgian AT planetc.com>]

Marie writes:


>Obviously a good education system isn't the only thing a country needs. By
>any reliable account, the Soviet system produced well-educated people.
Alas,
>that society was, and remains, dysfunctional in many basic ways.

You have pointed out the biggest non-sequitur in the whole education funding
argument.  Soviet society and economy collapsed but the educational
apologists are quick to say that it was "other factors".  Much as in this
country and our PS system we first say that everyone *must* receive the
cookie cutter education or our economy and society are at risk, so much so
that *any* amount of money we spend on it will yield returns.  So we spend
the money, and more money, and when no results are forthcoming, the
apologist says, "Ah, the lack of results is due to 'other factors'"

It's a false 'can't lose' proposition.  You have to pay me a lot of money to
get quality results but if there are no quality results due to my work, it
will always be due to "other factors."

Let's suppose for just a minute, indulge me, that more money and higher
salaries does NOT result in better education.  I would ask the educational
apologist what statistic or experiment we might contrive to test my posit ..
agreeing ahead of time what would be the criteria we would use to analyze
the facts and figures and confirm or contraindicate my premise.  The answer
would be (check Tvo's posts for examples) that it doesn't matter what the
facts are, it doesn't matter what the figures are,  if we pay more money for
education and get poorer results the ONLY possible conclusion is that it was
"other factors."

James

<<No, it [funding Mom staying at home] isn't going to happen -- not going to
happen en masse at any rate.
Neither major party can in any wise afford to have families reclaim their
autonomy. >>

You have that right. Additionally, I can't imagine that this country could
come up with a system of funding Mom without undermining male responsibility
even more than it's already been undermined.

Further, by making sure that women are well educated and able to go it alone
if they must, we avoid the problem of a large mass of dependent women who
have to fall in line with whatever their spouses want if they want to
continue getting support from them. Women with no options are a recipe for
spousal and child abuse. Heck, male responsibility doesn't seem all that
strong to me, even when women have good options.


<<But it's the term 'fund' that catches my attention.  My solution
to this would be to bar government from interfering in the economics of a
family in any way.  A few years ago there was the example of a single mother
who baked confections in her home and sold enough of them to support herself
and her children (this was in Mass, by the bye, the state whose muckings
started this thread).  The government (in the guise of the state dept of
acriculture) threatened her with legal action if she did not cease and
desist.  The community knew her, knew her products were safe and preferable,
and very much supported her.>>

Considering what health departments let on the market, I can only agree that
the sort of enforcement tactics you describe are based on misplaced
paternalism.  I don't know that there's any way to get rid of it, other than
keeping under the radar.

If anyone has hours and hours to listen, I can tell you how the supervisor
of my local state health office drove me nearly to murder (while the field
inspectors who we saw regularly were always helpful and decent). The
supervisor was obviously ideologically opposed to a small dairy. I'm sure I
chewed off parts of my tongue in my effort not to tell him what I really
thought of him -- but maybe not enuf parts.

<<   In that guise, says I, it is none of the
state's business what arrangement people have among themselves.   The
community volunteered her the use of the kitchen in the fire hall, which
kitchen was inspected.  Then the dept of health stepped in and said it was
only a valid inspection for fire personnel and she could not use it.>>

Arrrrrrrrrrrgh. It appears to me that there was a health dept. that had some
ideological problems too.

Marie

Funding could easily be arranged by removing the tax burden from families -
I don't mean direct withholding tax but Self Employment tax and the hidden
taxes in everything they use - and also making such people exempt from
'guild laws' which are designed to do nothing more than eliminate
competition from the big businesses and unions that have bought those laws
for themselves.

James




_______________________________________________
Homestead list and subscription:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead
Change your homestead list member options:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/homestead/mmcharry%40dtnspeed.net
View the archives at:
https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/homestead



_______________________________________________
Homestead list and subscription:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead
Change your homestead list member options:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/homestead/sgian%40planetc.com
View the archives at:
https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/homestead