Is The Constitution Obsolete?

Page 1 of 2 12 Last
  1. New Member
    INFOHAZARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    53
    Posts
    214
    Rep Power
    232
    Level
    12
    Lv. Percent
    63.43%

    Is The Constitution Obsolete?


    I would have considered that question absurd until recently, but with a recent poll of High School students

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/educati...ts-press_x.htm

    that shows that about 1/3 feel that "the First Amendment ges too far," and that 49% feel papers should get government approval before publishing stories, maybe it's time to ask the question....

    Does the government need to control the press formally and centralize power more in this time of war? Are checks and balances obsolete?
    Last edited by INFOHAZARD; 02-21-2005 at 04:55 PM. Reason: link update

  2. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2677
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.54%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by INFOHAZARD
    Does the government need to control the press formally and centralize power more in this time of war? Are checks and balances obsolete?
    I think a better question is: Did they ever work to begin with? The Constitution of the US has a nice little history to it, and a lot of people, myself included, think it was a dead letter from the beginning. It was essentially railroaded through the ratification process, quite a few legislatures that were against it were 'persuaded' to change their minds, New York being an example.

    No constitution can guarantee anyone's rights. Rights are universal but their enforcement has to be local, meaning unless you, me, and everyone else doesn't allow the government, or anyone else for that matter, to take them away, it really doesn't matter what's written on a piece of paper thousands of miles away. Without a commitment on the part of most individuals to fight for those rights they cease to exist. There's a difference between rights and privileges, but both are taken and held by force, political and physical.

    That poll of students, while frightening, isn't surprising to me. What I did love though was Bill Maher taking this and blaming it on kids being raised under the Bush administration, or the "Americans need to watch what they say administration." Seems they'll find a way to blame anything on Bush, and conveniently ignore the fact that most educators that are teaching the kids who took this poll are pretty solidly to the left politically.
  3. Advanced Member
    VanillaGorilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    893
    Rep Power
    588
    Level
    28
    Lv. Percent
    15.44%

    That poll of students, while frightening, isn't surprising to me. What I did love though was Bill Maher taking this and blaming it on kids being raised under the Bush administration, or the "Americans need to watch what they say administration." Seems they'll find a way to blame anything on Bush, and conveniently ignore the fact that most educators that are teaching the kids who took this poll are pretty solidly to the left politically.
    Great point. It's not the far right who think kids shouldn't learn about the founding fathers of this country because they were slave owners. It's not the conservatives who don't think parts of the constitution or the bill of rights shouldn't be taught because there is a reference to God on it. This has been going on longer than Bush was in office. Wait.............. would that mean that the left would have to blame Clinton?
    •   
       

  4. USA HOCKEY
    CEDeoudes59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    3,928
    Rep Power
    3204
    Level
    48
    Lv. Percent
    8.26%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    a large percent of history taught in middle and high schools today - vilifies the United States.
    Students are only learn about the USSR from their role in WWII. As far as they know, Stalin was our friend.
    My Little Site about Hair Loss & Anabolics-
    hair loss from steroids dot com
  5. USA HOCKEY
    CEDeoudes59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    3,928
    Rep Power
    3204
    Level
    48
    Lv. Percent
    8.26%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    i can't wait to see the George W. Bush lesson plan in 10 years.
    My Little Site about Hair Loss & Anabolics-
    hair loss from steroids dot com
  6. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2849
    Level
    52
    Lv. Percent
    88.96%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by Deoudes59
    a large percent of history taught in middle and high schools today - vilifies the United States.
    Students are only learn about the USSR from their role in WWII. As far as they know, Stalin was our friend.
    I'll never forget my middle school lesson where my teacher was justifying communism to the class and basically just saying society has brainwashed us into thinking that it doesn't work. LOL. At the time, I didn't see the importance of the topic..but within a couple years, I was like "WTF?" LOL.
  7. USA HOCKEY
    CEDeoudes59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    3,928
    Rep Power
    3204
    Level
    48
    Lv. Percent
    8.26%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    the most educated people in the world lack common sense.
    Common sense is obsolete to them, and replaced with analytical thought in every area of their life. They are so brilliant and foaming at the mouth with great new ideas - but can't translate those ideas into workable/realistic solutions - and are miserable because of it. they often blame the president.

    I have respect for most college professors, and especially those with a passion to teach - rather than simply do their research and give the finger to the students.

    But I always wondered: if these people are so brilliant (like a professor in economics) why isn't he on Wall Street where the real action is?
    My Little Site about Hair Loss & Anabolics-
    hair loss from steroids dot com
  8. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2849
    Level
    52
    Lv. Percent
    88.96%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by Deoudes59
    the most educated people in the world lack common sense.
    Common sense is obsolete to them, and replaced with analytical thought in every area of their life. They are so brilliant and foaming at the mouth with great new ideas - but can't translate those ideas into workable/realistic solutions - and are miserable because of it. they often blame the president.

    I have respect for most college professors, and especially those with a passion to teach - rather than simply do their research and give the finger to the students.
    I hear that. I like many of my teachers so long as they can shut their mouths about their political views--especially when I can tell often they are clearly uneducated on the matters. Of course there are others who are very educated and present a case from the other side that sounds very impressive, regardless of my disagreements with them.
    But I always wondered: if these people are so brilliant (like a professor in economics) why isn't he on Wall Street where the real action is?
    Exactly! LOL. Book smarts and "smarts" are two different things entirely.
  9. New Member
    INFOHAZARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    53
    Posts
    214
    Rep Power
    232
    Level
    12
    Lv. Percent
    63.43%

    Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    I think a better question is: Did they ever work to begin with? The Constitution of the US has a nice little history to it, and a lot of people, myself included, think it was a dead letter from the beginning. It was essentially railroaded through the ratification process, quite a few legislatures that were against it were 'persuaded' to change their minds, New York being an example.

    No constitution can guarantee anyone's rights. Rights are universal but their enforcement has to be local, meaning unless you, me, and everyone else doesn't allow the government, or anyone else for that matter, to take them away, it really doesn't matter what's written on a piece of paper thousands of miles away. Without a commitment on the part of most individuals to fight for those rights they cease to exist. There's a difference between rights and privileges, but both are taken and held by force, political and physical.

    That poll of students, while frightening, isn't surprising to me. What I did love though was Bill Maher taking this and blaming it on kids being raised under the Bush administration, or the "Americans need to watch what they say administration." Seems they'll find a way to blame anything on Bush, and conveniently ignore the fact that most educators that are teaching the kids who took this poll are pretty solidly to the left politically.
    You got this little data point where? I see no evidence that most teachers are "solidly to the left politically." In fact, I think it's something you made up. I mean unless you show me otherwise. I had both liberal and conservative teachers in my school. Further, it tended to be the coaches and military retirees who taught history and civics.

    You never did answer the question. Should we revise the constitution or shouldn't we?
    Last edited by INFOHAZARD; 02-22-2005 at 01:10 AM.
  10. New Member
    INFOHAZARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    53
    Posts
    214
    Rep Power
    232
    Level
    12
    Lv. Percent
    63.43%

    Quote Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla
    Great point. It's not the far right who think kids shouldn't learn about the founding fathers of this country because they were slave owners. It's not the conservatives who don't think parts of the constitution or the bill of rights shouldn't be taught because there is a reference to God on it. This has been going on longer than Bush was in office. Wait.............. would that mean that the left would have to blame Clinton?
    The Bill of Rights contains no reference to God. You should have paid attention in class.

    I was taught civics starting in 8th grade. These kids were still in High school. Unless something has changed, they were taught civics under Bush's administration. Somehow, I think it just isn't as simple as tht anyway, and it is an attack on something I wasn't asking.
  11. New Member
    INFOHAZARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    53
    Posts
    214
    Rep Power
    232
    Level
    12
    Lv. Percent
    63.43%

    Quote Originally Posted by Deoudes59
    a large percent of history taught in middle and high schools today - vilifies the United States.
    Students are only learn about the USSR from their role in WWII. As far as they know, Stalin was our friend.
    Sounds great. Maybe things have changed, but I took a whole course on "Americanism vs. Communism" in High School. Again, where are you getting your data? Any spcific examples?

    ANd still no one answers the question I asked. Do we need to revise the Constitution?
  12. New Member
    INFOHAZARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    53
    Posts
    214
    Rep Power
    232
    Level
    12
    Lv. Percent
    63.43%

    Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00
    I'll never forget my middle school lesson where my teacher was justifying communism to the class and basically just saying society has brainwashed us into thinking that it doesn't work. LOL. At the time, I didn't see the importance of the topic..but within a couple years, I was like "WTF?" LOL.
    You clearly went to a different High School than I did. So, do you think the Constitution should be revised or not?
  13. New Member
    INFOHAZARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    53
    Posts
    214
    Rep Power
    232
    Level
    12
    Lv. Percent
    63.43%

    Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00
    I hear that. I like many of my teachers so long as they can shut their mouths about their political views--especially when I can tell often they are clearly uneducated on the matters. Of course there are others who are very educated and present a case from the other side that sounds very impressive, regardless of my disagreements with them.
    Exactly! LOL. Book smarts and "smarts" are two different things entirely.
    One does find all kinds on high school and college campuses. So, Is the Constitution good to go, or does it need chaging?
  14. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2849
    Level
    52
    Lv. Percent
    88.96%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by INFOHAZARD
    You clearly went to a different High School than I did. So, do you think the Constitution should be revised or not?
    The constitution does not need to be revised, IMHO. I believe the constitution was perverted starting with Marbury v. Madison and judicial review. That's a huge part of the problem today. Activist judges have too much power.

    There are a few different philosophies some of the founding fathers held that I believe they would have changed their minds about had they lived in our world today. One such view was the popular view of isolationism / non-interventionism. 200 years ago you're safe from those with bad intent so long as you were 1000 yards away. Now, the circumference of our world is a very short distance to overcome.

    Just MHO.
  15. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2849
    Level
    52
    Lv. Percent
    88.96%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by INFOHAZARD
    One does find all kinds on high school and college campuses. So, Is the Constitution good to go, or does it need chaging?
    If you're implying that I should go to a "conservative" campus that's ludicrous. I think creatine liberal and conservative campuses would only create more resentment between the two ideologies.

    I just think that unless you're a political science professor, keep your politics to yourself! Is that too much to ask?
  16. Elite Member
    Matthew D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    5,014
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    46
    Lv. Percent
    99.58%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    Well, for the most part, most of the people I teach with DO keep their politics to themselves K. I think you just got on a very interesting campus. I teach in the life science division and the only time that politics show around there are when environmental things come up or something is focused on educational problems and that is only due to the fact that we as a group tend to want to keep the planet in the best shape that it can be or for the fact that we kinda know what we are doing when it comes to teaching...
  17. Advanced Member
    lozgod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Age
    40
    Posts
    660
    Rep Power
    458
    Level
    21
    Lv. Percent
    33.48%

    Well public opinion doensn't matter because with the Patriot Act it is now legally obsolete anyway. The government now has a license to do what ever they want.
  18. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2677
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.54%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by INFOHAZARD
    You got this little data point where? I see no evidence that most teachers are "solidly to the left politically." In fact, I think it's something you made up. I mean unless you show me otherwise. I had both liberal and conservative teachers in my school. Further, it tended to be the coaches and military retirees who taught history and civics.
    There have been numerous poles of teachers at all levels of education and they always show up being solidly to the left. Look them up, I really don't have the time to waste since you'll ignore it when posted anyway.

    You never did answer the question. Should we revise the constitution or shouldn't we?
    Actually I did, which if you read the post you'd realize. Revisions to the constitution are pointless because it derrives it's power from the willingness of the people to enforce it themselves. Most people don't give a ****. If most people think government control of the media is that way to go, it's the way we'll go, regardless of any revisions or nonrevisions of the constitution.
  19. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2677
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.54%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew D
    Well, for the most part, most of the people I teach with DO keep their politics to themselves K. I think you just got on a very interesting campus. I teach in the life science division and the only time that politics show around there are when environmental things come up or something is focused on educational problems and that is only due to the fact that we as a group tend to want to keep the planet in the best shape that it can be or for the fact that we kinda know what we are doing when it comes to teaching...
    I have to say it was the opposite at my campus. History teachers taught the Great Depression was the fault of greedy capitalists who overproduced nonperishable goods, there wasn't a single English or arts class of any kind the focus of which wasn't how evil white males are, and I found only one economics instructor who thought central planning and socialism/communism weren't all that great. In the sciences department there wasn't a single prof who questioned global warming climate change theories, nor was there one who thought anything else other than command and control government regulation was the way to curb the problem. Back to history and humanities, I took four classes where the American Civil War played a pretty central role, one history and three lit, and not one of them mentioned tarriffs as even a contributing factor to the South's decision to leave the union. Abraham Lincoln was a saint, no one mentioned the fact that he bankrupted his home state with a series of idiotic policies before becoming president, and the Civil War was about nothing else than freeing the slaves. According to them that is. And this was all back when I was a liberal too, and even as a liberal I noticed the info was more than a little slanted.
  20. Advanced Member
    VanillaGorilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    893
    Rep Power
    588
    Level
    28
    Lv. Percent
    15.44%

    The Bill of Rights contains no reference to God. You should have paid attention in class.

    I was taught civics starting in 8th grade. These kids were still in High school. Unless something has changed, they were taught civics under Bush's administration. Somehow, I think it just isn't as simple as tht anyway, and it is an attack on something I wasn't asking.
    So your saying it's not that simple but then you are turning around blaming Bush for it? This crap was being done long before Bush took office and the people who are dumbing down teaching the constitution sure as hell aren't conservative. As you agreed in other thread the founders of this country would today be called right wing extremists. This would mean that modern-day liberalism would be inconsistent with the constitution. I said " parts of the constitution or the bill of rights". The bill of rights I was referring to a teacher who brought in a book of Jefferson's thoughts on it and was reprimanded for it because he made a reference to God in his writings. Once again you ignored my point.
  21. Advanced Member
    VanillaGorilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    893
    Rep Power
    588
    Level
    28
    Lv. Percent
    15.44%

    Well public opinion doensn't matter because with the Patriot Act it is now legally obsolete anyway. The government now has a license to do what ever they want.
    That's not exactly true. A federal judge struck down some of the provisions in it , which the government is appealing.
  22. Advanced Member
    VanillaGorilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    893
    Rep Power
    588
    Level
    28
    Lv. Percent
    15.44%

    One does find all kinds on high school and college campuses. So, Is the Constitution good to go, or does it need chaging?
    No it doesn't need to be changed it needs to be taught to the kids. Part of the problem is when it is taught teachers refer to it as a living document. This means the teacher doesn't like certain parts of it and thinks it needs to be changed particularly the second amendment. Then they hate the founders of the country because they owned slaves. Then their warped way of thinking the founders should not be taught either. Then they hate the catholic and Christian religions. Again, take something like Lincolns second inaugural address. He had about 6 references to God in the speech.... so better not teach that either. Now fast forward this type of teaching to after 9-11 and what kind of thinking are you going to get for these kids? The constitution is a living document........ well the world is a different place lets do away with the first amendment........and that thing about unreasonable searches..... and... welcome to a brave new world.
  23. Advanced Member
    VanillaGorilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    893
    Rep Power
    588
    Level
    28
    Lv. Percent
    15.44%

    Well public opinion doensn't matter because with the Patriot Act it is now legally obsolete anyway. The government now has a license to do what ever they want.
    I think most people would agree that if the government suspects a person of being a terrorist that last thing we want is for the terrorist to know the governments watching them. On the other hand there are some things that are in the p-act that are troubling , particularly if a person is picked up they aren't allowed to tell anyone not even a lawyer.
  24. Elite Member
    Matthew D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    5,014
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    46
    Lv. Percent
    99.58%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    In the sciences department there wasn't a single prof who questioned global warming climate change theories, nor was there one who thought anything else other than command and control government regulation was the way to curb the problem.
    Well as for questioning the global warming climate change theories.. that is on going but from the information WE HAVE right now, it is happening.. what impact we don't have a real clue yet. But I am one that likes to side on the side of caution when it comes to screwing up the ONLY world we have at the present time. And science is an ongoing changing subject. It is far from static and if you have teachers that are telling you that, then they are saddly mistaken. Any good researcher or teacher in science will tell you this is what we know now and it is subject to change.
    The main reason that most researchers believe that government controls are the only way is the past record of business not curb itself when it comes to making a buck. Invasive species like the Nutria that was brought over for the beaver hat industry and then released after the price of hat dropped. This is just one example and I am not condeming all business because there are some good environmentallly friendly companies out there but they are the exception not the norm. Other than government regulation, how do you keep the companies from dumping tons of pollutants into the rivers, so that we have another Cuyahoga River catching fire like it did in June of 1969
  25. New Member
    INFOHAZARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    53
    Posts
    214
    Rep Power
    232
    Level
    12
    Lv. Percent
    63.43%

    Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00
    If you're implying that I should go to a "conservative" campus that's ludicrous. I think creatine liberal and conservative campuses would only create more resentment between the two ideologies.

    I just think that unless you're a political science professor, keep your politics to yourself! Is that too much to ask?
    I think you've read more into my words than I said. I said what I said. I did not say and did not mean what you inferred.
  26. New Member
    INFOHAZARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    53
    Posts
    214
    Rep Power
    232
    Level
    12
    Lv. Percent
    63.43%

    Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    There have been numerous poles of teachers at all levels of education and they always show up being solidly to the left. Look them up, I really don't have the time to waste since you'll ignore it when posted anyway.
    Ye of little faith. If someone takes the effort, I can really respect that. I've learned a lot that way.



    Actually I did, which if you read the post you'd realize. Revisions to the constitution are pointless because it derrives it's power from the willingness of the people to enforce it themselves. Most people don't give a ****. If most people think government control of the media is that way to go, it's the way we'll go, regardless of any revisions or nonrevisions of the constitution.
    So that's a "NO," right?
  27. New Member
    INFOHAZARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    53
    Posts
    214
    Rep Power
    232
    Level
    12
    Lv. Percent
    63.43%

    Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    I have to say it was the opposite at my campus. History teachers taught the Great Depression was the fault of greedy capitalists who overproduced nonperishable goods, there wasn't a single English or arts class of any kind the focus of which wasn't how evil white males are, and I found only one economics instructor who thought central planning and socialism/communism weren't all that great. In the sciences department there wasn't a single prof who questioned global warming climate change theories, nor was there one who thought anything else other than command and control government regulation was the way to curb the problem. Back to history and humanities, I took four classes where the American Civil War played a pretty central role, one history and three lit, and not one of them mentioned tarriffs as even a contributing factor to the South's decision to leave the union. Abraham Lincoln was a saint, no one mentioned the fact that he bankrupted his home state with a series of idiotic policies before becoming president, and the Civil War was about nothing else than freeing the slaves. According to them that is. And this was all back when I was a liberal too, and even as a liberal I noticed the info was more than a little slanted.
    So what would you recommend be done about such a slant?
  28. New Member
    INFOHAZARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    53
    Posts
    214
    Rep Power
    232
    Level
    12
    Lv. Percent
    63.43%

    Quote Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla
    So your saying it's not that simple but then you are turning around blaming Bush for it?
    Um, no. That's not what I said.


    As you agreed in other thread the founders of this country would today be called right wing extremists.
    Um, no; that's not what I said. I believe I called them Leftist Libertarians. Of course, they were around before all the "means of production" issues became big...

    Leftist libertarian...


    This would mean that modern-day liberalism would be inconsistent with the constitution. I said " parts of the constitution or the bill of rights". The bill of rights I was referring to a teacher who brought in a book of Jefferson's thoughts on it and was reprimanded for it because he made a reference to God in his writings. Once again you ignored my point.
    You misquoted me.

    Besides, a book of Jefferson's thoughts on the Bill of Rights is not the Bill of Rights. here is a difference.

    By the way, what was the name of that book? I'm familiar with Jefferson's writings on god (he used the small "g"). It should be an interesting book.
  29. New Member
    INFOHAZARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    53
    Posts
    214
    Rep Power
    232
    Level
    12
    Lv. Percent
    63.43%

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew D
    Well as for questioning the global warming climate change theories.. that is on going but from the information WE HAVE right now, it is happening.. what impact we don't have a real clue yet. But I am one that likes to side on the side of caution when it comes to screwing up the ONLY world we have at the present time. And science is an ongoing changing subject. It is far from static and if you have teachers that are telling you that, then they are saddly mistaken. Any good researcher or teacher in science will tell you this is what we know now and it is subject to change.
    The main reason that most researchers believe that government controls are the only way is the past record of business not curb itself when it comes to making a buck. Invasive species like the Nutria that was brought over for the beaver hat industry and then released after the price of hat dropped. This is just one example and I am not condeming all business because there are some good environmentallly friendly companies out there but they are the exception not the norm. Other than government regulation, how do you keep the companies from dumping tons of pollutants into the rivers, so that we have another Cuyahoga River catching fire like it did in June of 1969
    Oh, come ON, Matthew. What's a few yards of sea level mean anyway? I mean among friends?
  30. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2677
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.54%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew D
    The main reason that most researchers believe that government controls are the only way is the past record of business not curb itself when it comes to making a buck. Invasive species like the Nutria that was brought over for the beaver hat industry and then released after the price of hat dropped. This is just one example and I am not condeming all business because there are some good environmentallly friendly companies out there but they are the exception not the norm. Other than government regulation, how do you keep the companies from dumping tons of pollutants into the rivers, so that we have another Cuyahoga River catching fire like it did in June of 1969
    By making them pay for it, which can only be done if people own their property totally. Right now it's economic externality for them. That's the problem with the way most profs approach the subject. They ignore the fact that most if not all pollution happens through either government neglect or collusion. It wasn't too long ago that judges decided that companies aren't polluting so long as they pollute as much as everyone else. Questions to ask would be: why do the worst pollution and other types of environmental damage (deforrestation is a great example) generally happen on government owned property? Why is it that in industries where companies are allowed complete ownership of the resources they use, pollution and environmental damage is less than in those with heavy government intervention (answer: because they have a long term interest in the value of the resource, be it land, trees, coal, fish, etc)? Why is it that when laws protect rather than destroy property rights, pollution goes down (a good example of this is private ownership of rivers or pieces of rivers, as happens in some European countries). The government is not the protector of our planet, it's complicit in its destruction more often than not. Their standards even do physical and economic harm. Some examples cited from an article by Patrick Weinert:

    "In 1994, under threat of lawsuit, the EPA forced the Pennsylvania state legislature to spend $145 million of taxpayers' money on the construction of 86 automobile emissions test centers. Later that same year, EPA officials realized that the project was a mistake, but forced the legislature to buy the empty buildings nonetheless.

    "In 1996 the EPA demanded that citizens in Salmon, Idaho close down the town's two sawdust-burning heaters and replace them with propane heaters at a price of $750,000. Seeing a rural population of only 3,100 in the town with most airborne pollutants consisting of road dust and pollen, the EPA was more successful at cleaning out the Salmonites' bank accounts than at cleaning their air.

    "During the summer of 1995, due to new federal limits placed on power plant emissions, utility companies in Chicago were forced to raise their prices for electricity. Over 700 residents of the city perished in their apartments from dehydration and heat stroke, many of whom had air conditioners but could not afford to turn them on."

    When the government sets arbitrary standards industries aim for them, regardless of whether or not there are better ways to achieve the ends people seem to want, or if those standards are even really necessary. When the government removes the price of a clean environment from the actual process of getting it clean, they waste resources and create inefficiencies that make it harder to reach that end of a clean, well balanced environment.

    They also ignore the tendency of pollution to follow an inverted U curve. That is, the richer a society gets the more it can afford to worry about and actually do something about its environment. What people don't want to accept is that some level of pollution will always be there, and is probably necessary even to make the transition from primitive third world economies to more advanced ones. Most people think populations and pollution both keep going up and up, and it just doesn't work that way. People want to live in a clean world, but they need to be able to afford it before it can happen. That only happens with economic development, which government regulation stiffles.

    A good lecture, relevant to this thread, can be found here: http://www.mises.org/Media/?action=showname&ID=39. It's worth a listen.
  31. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2677
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.54%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by INFOHAZARD
    So what would you recommend be done about such a slant?
    Nothing. If someone is pissed about the slant they can voice their own opinion. There's no need to 'do' anything. I would certainly like an end to government involvment in education, but not for this reason. This is just a nuisance at most.
  32. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2849
    Level
    52
    Lv. Percent
    88.96%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew D
    Well, for the most part, most of the people I teach with DO keep their politics to themselves K. I think you just got on a very interesting campus. I teach in the life science division and the only time that politics show around there are when environmental things come up or something is focused on educational problems and that is only due to the fact that we as a group tend to want to keep the planet in the best shape that it can be or for the fact that we kinda know what we are doing when it comes to teaching...
    LOL. Take me there!

    The funny thing about my situation is, where I go to school it's VERY conservative area. It's upper-middle class white America composed of entrepreneurs and soccer moms. The escalade is the mini-van of the area and it's not too uncommon to see a Ferrari or Lamborghini roll by (too bad I'm not in one of those families LOL). Even then, my teachers have been pretty pushy with their leftist political beliefs. It's quite odd...but maybe that's just california, eh?
  33. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2677
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.54%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00
    LOL. Take me there!

    The funny thing about my situation is, where I go to school it's VERY conservative area. It's upper-middle class white America composed of entrepreneurs and soccer moms. The escalade is the mini-van of the area and it's not too uncommon to see a Ferrari or Lamborghini roll by (too bad I'm not in one of those families LOL). Even then, my teachers have been pretty pushy with their leftist political beliefs. It's quite odd...but maybe that's just california, eh?
    Could be. I'm in New York which is pretty heavily liberal too.
  34. Advanced Member
    VanillaGorilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    893
    Rep Power
    588
    Level
    28
    Lv. Percent
    15.44%

    Nothing. If someone is pissed about the slant they can voice their own opinion. There's no need to 'do' anything. I would certainly like an end to government involvment in education, but not for this reason. This is just a nuisance at most.
    Certainly there is not allot that can be done. The one suggestion I would have is for them to actually teach journalism in college not activism.
  35. Advanced Member
    VanillaGorilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    893
    Rep Power
    588
    Level
    28
    Lv. Percent
    15.44%

    Um, no. That's not what I said.
    These kids were still in High school. Unless something has changed, they were taught civics under Bush's administration.
    How is that not Blaming Bush?
    Um, no; that's not what I said. I believe I called them Leftist Libertarians. Of course, they were around before all the "means of production" issues became big...

    Leftist libertarian...
    Libertarians..yes, leftists absolutely not. The founders were for gun rights and if you recall one of the reasons the revolutionary war started was because of taxes. Those two issues alone shows that the founders were not leftists.
    Besides, a book of Jefferson's thoughts on the Bill of Rights is not the Bill of Rights. here is a difference.

    By the way, what was the name of that book? I'm familiar with Jefferson's writings on god (he used the small "g"). It should be an interesting book.
    I am not sure of the name of the book but the teacher was from CA (of coarse) and it made the news about 2 months ago.
  36. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2677
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.54%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla
    Certainly there is not allot that can be done. The one suggestion I would have is for them to actually teach journalism in college not activism.
    It'd be nice, but I don't see how it could be done without government intervention, which automatically makes it a nonstarter for me.
  37. New Member
    INFOHAZARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    53
    Posts
    214
    Rep Power
    232
    Level
    12
    Lv. Percent
    63.43%

    Quote Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla
    How is that not Blaming Bush?

    Libertarians..yes, leftists absolutely not. The founders were for gun rights and if you recall one of the reasons the revolutionary war started was because of taxes. Those two issues alone shows that the founders were not leftists.

    I am not sure of the name of the book but the teacher was from CA (of coarse) and it made the news about 2 months ago.
    Leftist, in the traditional sense of Liberal that they'd recognize: Power in the hands of the people as opposed to being in the hands of the Government. In this respect I agree with you, and am flummoxed as to how the modern left has abandoned this basic principle of owning arms to protect yourself from
    your own government.

    As Alexander Hamilton wrote:
    "...If circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist.''


    Heck, what would they do if the ballot boxes were ever compromised? All that would be left would be recourse to arms.

    That's one major issue I have with the mainstream left.

    As for taxes in the Revolutionary War, the Tea Act, which led to the Boston Tea Party, was effectively a tax cut, but only for tea bought through the East India Company, not for the myriad of independent importers sprouting up in the colonies. This tax cut was basically designed to put the independents out of business.
  38. New Member
    INFOHAZARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    53
    Posts
    214
    Rep Power
    232
    Level
    12
    Lv. Percent
    63.43%

    Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00
    LOL. Take me there!

    The funny thing about my situation is, where I go to school it's VERY conservative area. It's upper-middle class white America composed of entrepreneurs and soccer moms. The escalade is the mini-van of the area and it's not too uncommon to see a Ferrari or Lamborghini roll by (too bad I'm not in one of those families LOL). Even then, my teachers have been pretty pushy with their leftist political beliefs. It's quite odd...but maybe that's just california, eh?
    I admire your resistance to their indocternation efforts. Do those with weaker wills need to be protected by law from such subversive thoughts and ideas?
  39. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2849
    Level
    52
    Lv. Percent
    88.96%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by INFOHAZARD
    I admire your resistance to their indocternation efforts. Do those with weaker wills need to be protected by law from such subversive thoughts and ideas?
    No, they don't need to be protected by law. In fact, the law should be more lenient in that area. B/C here in my area my conservative teachers are scared to open their mouths. The liberals run their mouths all day. If the laws were more leniet both sides would be running their mouths and the students would hear more info from both ideologies. That's assuming they wont' ever keep their political opinions to themselves I"d rather they do that as a matter of decency, but assuming that will never happen I'd lobby for more freedom to express political opinion.
  40. USA HOCKEY
    CEDeoudes59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    3,928
    Rep Power
    3204
    Level
    48
    Lv. Percent
    8.26%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    my hometown sounds kind of like that. I don't live there anymore.
    http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lis...sehold_income/
    Potomac, MD.

    Very very Liberal, very very Jewish as well. We elected a republican governor just 2 years ago however.
    The area, however, is becoming more conservative as the democractic party is drifting left. It is socially very very liberal, but the folks understand a Democratic president will tax them over 60%.
    Bush got slightly more of the Jewish vote - and slightly less of the Arab/Persian vote. Maryland, obviously, a Kerry stronghold.
    My Little Site about Hair Loss & Anabolics-
    hair loss from steroids dot com
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Why a casein/whey protein combo is the best for growth
    By YellowJacket in forum Supplements
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-25-2006, 01:19 AM
  2. Honey is the natural carbohydrate source for endurance
    By windwords7 in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 04-21-2004, 11:55 PM
  3. What the hell is the ultimate point in BULKING?
    By strictlyswole in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-17-2003, 09:31 PM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-02-2003, 01:54 PM
  5. This is the friggin education board
    By teekahty in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-22-2003, 05:17 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Log in
Log in