Marijuana Prohibition ended in Colorado!

[the2real4mafol]

SamuelRSmith said:

the2real4mafol said:

1. No, state schools are not free, but like public healthcare, everyone has a bit of their taxes pay towards them. These services are done for the people, instead for the sake of profit. As, it's your taxes that pay for them, rather than money up front, that means the poorest and neediest in society can have access to them.

"Done for the people" Teachers unions say hello... 

You do realise that poor children still go to the worst schools, right? Because the middle class and rich families drive up house prices around good schools. The only difference is, instead of the schools getting the money, it's the property owners that have no involvement in providing the education.

Combine this with the fact that private schools home tutoring provide far greater results at lower costs, it becomes really hard to see how the state is providing a "much needed" service, and even harder to see that they're actually doing a good job of it.

Finally, we still have the issue that the state is providing an education... why do you think the left can count on the youth vote so easily? Maybe because they've just spent over a decade in a pro-socialist propaganda factory? Many teachers are socialist, and the curriculum is extremely pro-Government. Do you not see a problem with this? (Probably not, it seems the schools did their job very well, with you).

2. The US state played a part in the recession because they deregulated the banks, so the banks themselves did very risky deals. For example, loaning houses to those who can't afford them, which was very stupid. But if you are so certain, give some examples of economies recovering from recession without government intervention.

1921.

Also, watch the video... the bank deregulation and other policies were very little to do with what I'm talking about. Central banks is the issue, here.

3. As for the police, they should just get on with their job and arrest true crimenals not drug takers (if they wanted to do that, just let them)! They should not be influenced to arrest someone just to make some extra money. It's not right. And if legalising drugs, means police actually charge more murderers and muggers than before, then good, they are actual criminals. If you think a drug addict is a criminal, please say why?

Never made that claim, please point to where I have.

You know that police have quotas, right? Not for catching muggers, but for handing out speeding tickets, catching people without seatbelts, etc.... because the state makes money out of those. It's these sorts of laws that will be enforced with the drug money, not muggings or murders.

4. You keep on saying corporations are products of the state, well prove it. As for the profit motive, i'm not against it, it's a persons choice to profit but what I don't like is the use of outsourcing so they can sell products at maximum price in the developed world, and pay peanuts to the workers of the developing world. For example, Nike trainers cost at least £60 a pair, but only £1 to make becuase they were made in India, if they made them in the UK, they would cost maybe £10 to £15, they would still profit alot here and give jobs to people too. Let India industrialise like we did, with there own companies. 

Corporations are product of the state. A corporation is a contract between the state and a group of people. Corporate "personhood" is a product of law, not the market.

I'm not going to debate the Nike claim, because there's so many economics fallacies there, that I neither have the time nor the inclination to bother with. If you actually want to learn something (based on your history on this board, I doubt it), read up on productivity and its links to wages.

But how do workers profit? They work for a wage, which isn't negiatated between the boss and workers

If the worker didn't profit, they wouldn't work. They obviously deem the wage to be profitable... or they wouldn't accept it. As for your second statement, it's not, no. Profits aren't negotiated at the micro-level. When you're buying a pair of jeans, do you negotiate the price? No. But negotiation does occur across the macro-level, through the price system. Wages are the same.

5. As for the envirionment, how does a liberal economy protect it without the state. Surely, property rights were given by the government to a business. Even if it does, you are still destoying the habitats and concreting over them to build factories and other buildings. Not only that, but factories give alot of pollution. You could see it in London, 60 years ago and you can see it in Beijing now. 

Government does not give rights. Again, this is another huge topic. Just Youtube for Walter Block on environmentalism, if you want to learn about it.

1. What would you rather no education or a bad one? At least they get one. But lets see if these new academies do better. And you say about the property owners making lots of money around good schools, but that has as much market involvement as government, since govt don't own houses (only flats!) 

As i said i would rather have some service than none at all, if private companies could responsibly price services like healthcare or education so the poor could go than it would be fine. But instead they price the poor out of their services altogether, you can see in developing country especially. 

Oh so you wonder why the youth are so radical do you? It's because we naturally rebel against whatever rules over us at that age. You could see it with the hippy movement in America at the time of the Vietnam war. the older you get, the more you want stuff tp stay the same, which is where the conservatives come in. But yes, some of my teachers are socialist but they don't like the main parties at all, they see a protest as a way of getting your voice heard instead of a vote. But i just don't see how my education was propaganda, the Nazi or the Soviet education is what could be called propaganda though. Also, i feel government should play a role in society, but what makes you i like them? The leaders are just in it for themselves anyway, we knew this from the expenses scandal the other year. 

But let me ask, what is your problem with socialism? It's just an alternative to the neo-liberal way. What makes you think your political beliefs are right? it depends on perspective

2. i looked up the 1920-21 depression and the US government did have a part they cut the budget by 65% in one year and hiked up taxes. But whatever else happened back then worked extremely well, cutting unemployment from neraly 12% in 1921 to just above 2% in 1923! That sort of progress is what is needed in the EU. What i don't get is why such measures what not done just 10 years later in the great depression. I wish one of the worse off countries like Spain would let the market run there cause to see if this happened now.

 http://fee.org/the_freeman/detail/the-depression-youve-never-heard-of-1920-1921/

3. No i had no idea there were quotas and i don't see why they would need quotas either.

4. & 5. Ok i will do just that, i will have a look at these things