Philosophy of Self Ownership

[One-Eye]

Human habit or human nature, it doesn't matter. Bitching is what we <i>do</i>, regardless of whether it's ingrained in us socially or genetically. The point I'm making is that if we got rid of the government, that wouldn't stop people from wanting other people to fix their problems for them. That's why we like government. If somebody screws us over, we want to be able to sue them to make them pay. If somebody kills our friend, we want to see them locked up. There are things that private corporations <i>cannot</i> do without exerting that force that Doug so loathes. Freedom without government isn't freedom at all. It's the worst kind of slavery (because there's no one there to protect you from anyone who might want to take your freedoms away).

But I agree that the government exists mainly to protect people from each other. What may constitute that protection is, of course, up to interpretation.

(someone tell me why, after I promise not to argue these things anymore, I keep coming back...)

[Corey]

That's what the government does. They decide on what your greater good is for you, and make you pay for it.

Though I understand what you're saying, I disagree with this statement. The government is directed, in great part, by the public. Using the word "They" here is synonymous with "the people". Behind every democratic government action is the voice of the people.

[One-Eye]

[Narbus]

That's what the government does. They decide on what your greater good is for you, and make you pay for it.

Though I understand what you're saying, I disagree with this statement. The government is directed, in great part, by the public. Using the word "They" here is synonymous with "the people". Behind every democratic government action is the voice of the people.

No, behind our "democratic" government is the voice of well-payed lobbyists, special interest groups, and large corporations with gifts to share.

Also, how is it "the people's" business what I do? I'm not hurting anyone else at all if I want to sit in my basement and toke it up, but I can't do so without threat of arrest. As a 19 year old, in college, on all kinds of "you rock and are smart" lists, I couldn't have a single glass of wine while dining out (even if I let someone else drive me home) without governmental retribution. "The people" decided it was for the greater good if I didn't do this stuff, and they gave the government the authority to keep me from minding my own business and not bothering anyone (authority they didn't have to give, by the way, but the government has really big guns). That's fair and just how, exactly?

[Corey]

I don't know... maybe because parents don't want their kids exposed to that sort of behavior.

[mosaik]

Human habit or human nature, it doesn't matter. Bitching is what we <i>do</i>, regardless of whether it's ingrained in us socially or genetically.

It's not what we do. I don't. It's what you do.

The point I'm making is that if we got rid of the government, that wouldn't stop people from wanting other people to fix their problems for them. That's why we like government.

correct. your point about people wanting others to fix their problems is true - but it's not reasonable for people to want that. so who cares what they want?

If somebody screws us over, we want to be able to sue them to make them pay. If somebody kills our friend, we want to see them locked up. There are things that private corporations <i>cannot</i> do without exerting that force that Doug so loathes.

I loathe, for the millionth time, the initiation of violence. stoping a murderer is self defense, not pre-emptive force.

Freedom without government isn't freedom at all. It's the worst kind of slavery (because there's no one there to protect you from anyone who might want to take your freedoms away).

Does government protect you? I think not. Let's review. we know that government strips people of the freedom to do what they want with/to their bodies. we know that governments don't allow you to speak freely, to move freely, to work freely. they tax your income. they legislate about what you can sell. the soldier doesn't protect us - he takes our freedoms. if there was no soldier, who would we need protecting from?

perhaps you mean the state protects us from criminals with their government police. we know that these police are humans like other humans and therefore failable. some government police are criminals themsevles. do they stop murders? no - they arrive AFTER the victim has died. do they stop rapes? no - they SOLVE them.

you want protection from the irrational? buy a gun. anybody who hopes the government will protect them and raise their kids will wind up dead and childless.

But I agree that the government exists mainly to protect people from each other. What may constitute that protection is, of course, up to interpretation.

i dispute your assertion that the state as it exists today functions mainly in a protector's role. today your government exists for ONE purpose - to get LARGER. if you disagree, i'd like to hear why.

Corey, Narbus answered you exactly how i would have so i'm leaving your post alone for the time being.

[Narbus]

I don't know... maybe because parents don't want their kids exposed to that sort of behavior.

I did say that I would be in the basement, while toking up. There is no "exposure" involved. Also, I don't care. If parents don't want their children drinking, then they need to sit down with their child and actually parent them. It's not my job to parent everyone else's child. I didn't make the decision to have a child, I should not be held accountable for anyone else's decision to have a child.

[Bandalero]

actually i was pointing out how force was necessary to rid the world of people like hitler and mousalini.(SP) how would you have removed hitlet from power? i liked the way you put bush in there, however he's acting on a UN resolution, as in everyone that agreed to this piece of paper is here by guilty of being considered one of the "bad guys" here.

UN resolutions are not worth the paper they're written on.

I am not a pacifist. i just don't believe in the iniation of force or fraud to take life, liberty or property. all governments and all government supporters believe in this. how would i stop hitler? with force. but understand that i would be acting in self defense, not unmitigated aggression.

your government, by the way, is/was acting on unmitigated aggression and not self-defense in Iraq.

Anarchist don't march, they're not active in any movement to rid government. they talk theories, they write books, they hand out stickers, but don't threaten the norm like all revolutionist should. there has not been an anarchist state anywhere on this planet during our modern history. don't you get it, no one is doing anything. get off your asses and prove me and the rest of us government loving folks wrong. the truth is, you can't. Martin Luther King, Ramsey Muniz, Ceasar Chavez, Malcom X, Che Guevara, The founding fathers of the US, and all the others, they had BALLS. Do you know that castro came to the states, he got federal money, took it home to Cuba and funded his way up to the top, only to turn comunist. is he a hipocrit for taking a democracy's money and investing it into a communist state? he's successful, doesn't matter how he funded himself, he got it done. which is alot more then i can say for the Anarchist movement.

I don't want a revolution. I don't want to lead you or other government lovers like sheep. i want people to WAKE UP and think for themselves - not have me doing their thinking for them.

how else are people gonna "wake up"? If society has been "asleep" for thousands of years how is it they're gonna "wake up" all of a sudden and rid themselves of government? you should be the alarm clock that opens peoples eyes, because it takes a loud voice to wake people up from the status quo. but really, what makes you think everyone is asleep? how do you know if people are thinking for themselves and have come to the conclusion that government is necessary? you don't, but you sure as hell like to think that they're mindless zombies that do what big brother tells them to and what not. in many cases, government lovers are thinking for themselves, and they choose government. and it's pissing you off.

[One-Eye]

Human habit or human nature, it doesn't matter. Bitching is what we <i>do</i>, regardless of whether it's ingrained in us socially or genetically.

It's not what we do. I don't. It's what you do.

You're kidding, right, Mr. Bitch-About-Government-All-The-Livelong-Day?

The point I'm making is that if we got rid of the government, that wouldn't stop people from wanting other people to fix their problems for them. That's why we like government.

correct. your point about people wanting others to fix their problems is true - but it's not reasonable for people to want that. so who cares what they want?

So... you're saying that people shouldn't be free to have what they want (governmental protection) because it doesn't fall under your definition of what's "reasonable". Doesn't sound like you value freedom at all, only your ability to do whatever you feel like.

If somebody screws us over, we want to be able to sue them to make them pay. If somebody kills our friend, we want to see them locked up. There are things that private corporations <i>cannot</i> do without exerting that force that Doug so loathes.

I loathe, for the millionth time, the initiation of violence. stoping a murderer is self defense, not pre-emptive force.

Sure enough. But that's not what I was talking about. If you are unable to stop a murder from happening (because you weren't around when your wife was murdered, say), you're comfortable with just letting that murderer roam free? To do anything about it, you'd have to hire a private detective company to find out who did it, and then exact whatever vengeance you have in mind, with you being effectively judge, jury, and executioner.

Mmmm, what a wonderful, free, and wholesome world that would be!

Freedom without government isn't freedom at all. It's the worst kind of slavery (because there's no one there to protect you from anyone who might want to take your freedoms away).

Does government protect you? I think not. Let's review. we know that government strips people of the freedom to do what they want with/to their bodies. we know that governments don't allow you to speak freely, to move freely, to work freely. they tax your income. they legislate about what you can sell. the soldier doesn't protect us - he takes our freedoms. if there was no soldier, who would we need protecting from?

perhaps you mean the state protects us from criminals with their government police. we know that these police are humans like other humans and therefore failable. some government police are criminals themsevles. do they stop murders? no - they arrive AFTER the victim has died. do they stop rapes? no - they SOLVE them.

you want protection from the irrational? buy a gun. anybody who hopes the government will protect them and raise their kids will wind up dead and childless.

Propaganda without facts, evidence, theories, or explanations... not worth my time to refute...

But I agree that the government exists mainly to protect people from each other. What may constitute that protection is, of course, up to interpretation.

i dispute your assertion that the state as it exists today functions mainly in a protector's role. today your government exists for ONE purpose - to get LARGER. if you disagree, i'd like to hear why.

The government doesn't always serve the role it should. It's corrupt, and it's too big, I agree. But an ideal government would exist only for protection, and would do so in an effective, expedient, and frugal way as possible.

[Bandalero]

I don't know... maybe because parents don't want their kids exposed to that sort of behavior.

I did say that I would be in the basement, while toking up. There is no "exposure" involved. Also, I don't care. If parents don't want their children drinking, then they need to sit down with their child and actually parent them. It's not my job to parent everyone else's child. I didn't make the decision to have a child, I should not be held accountable for anyone else's decision to have a child.

maybe because before the age of 21, alcohol affects growth, and smoking before 18 isn't a very healthy thing to do. says who? the government? how about independent studies, studies that parents can't do on their own. yeah parents should be completely accountable for their children, however how are they gonna know when it's safe for their child to engage in drinking or smoking? these same studies prove also that weed isn't healthy to use at any age. sure it has medicinal advantages, but the abuse of this natural substance is what's keeping it illegal. Government would love to tax your stash, they'd make a hell of a lot more money that way. so why don't they? because it's too dangerous and unhealthy and the countries health is obviously important. don't think they don't care about your childs health.....what about the removal of vending machines at many schools, or the government mandated fitness tests? they do care, however as a parent your responsible for your kid, his actions, and his behaviors. since school is a state government runned institution (at least in Texas it is) they just wants to see that children in their care are healthy. During the 8 hours of school they want to help parents. the same parents that work more hours then anyone else in the world, and might be stuck in traffic until dark, or could it be, might come home tired?

[mosaik]

You're kidding, right, Mr. Bitch-About-Government-All-The-Livelong-Day?

I am not bitching. I am making a rational argument against the existence of a state which intereferes with my life. there's a huge difference between my saying "all government is dependant on force, fear and hatred" and my saying "goddamn their oughtta be a law!"

So... you're saying that people shouldn't be free to have what they want (governmental protection) because it doesn't fall under your definition of what's "reasonable". Doesn't sound like you value freedom at all, only your ability to do whatever you feel like.

harumph. People should be free to have what they want - but not at my expense, and never if they need to iniate force or fraud to get it. who protects you at my expense using force or fraud?

Sure enough. But that's not what I was talking about. If you are unable to stop a murder from happening (because you weren't around when your wife was murdered, say), you're comfortable with just letting that murderer roam free? To do anything about it, you'd have to hire a private detective company to find out who did it, and then exact whatever vengeance you have in mind, with you being effectively judge, jury, and executioner.

Mmmm, what a wonderful, free, and wholesome world that would be!

precisely. i am comfortable letting him roam free until i find him. and i am comfortable dealing out justice. i am just as fit to decide his fate as any jury of his peers - we are all human beings after all with none of us having any more divine judgement then the others.

Propaganda without facts, evidence, theories, or explanations... not worth my time to refute...

Sigh. It's actually simple rational fact. but let me lay it out for you: I said the government strips me of the freedom to do what i want with my body. They do: prostitution and narcotics are both illegal. I said they don't allow me to move freely, and they don't: immigration laws. I said they legislate what i can sell and they do: zoning regulation, laws against narcotics/sex/booze etc etc. I said if there were no soldier who would we need protecting from - that's just a question, do you have an answer?

I said that government police are sometimes criminals - they are. I said that they solve murders and they do. I said that they solve rapes and they do. The key word here is solve, as in, after the crime is commited. That's not protection, Aerin - what do i care if they caught my killer if i'm DEAD?

The government doesn't always serve the role it should. It's corrupt, and it's too big, I agree. But an ideal government would exist only for protection, and would do so in an effective, expedient, and frugal way as possible.

Agreed. If there has to be a government that is the role it should fill. unfortunately i believe that no government has ever existed where it doesn't yearn to get bigger. it's just what happens.

[Narbus]

maybe because before the age of 21, alcohol affects growth, and smoking before 18 isn't a very healthy thing to do. says who? the government? how about independent studies, studies that parents can't do on their own.

And where, exactly, did I say I wanted people to stop reading independent studies? Gogo independent studies! But if I read the independent study, and decide for me that I want to smoke, or drink, or whatever, then what right do you have to make me stop? Sitting in my basement, not bothering anyone at all, I start toking up and drinking a beer. I want a specific reason that this affects you, and should be illegal.

[/quote]yeah parents should be completely accountable for their children, however how are they gonna know when it's safe for their child to engage in drinking or smoking?[/quote]
They read the studies. Whee.
There's clearly a market out there to inform people of what is healthy for them. Go to the bookstore, and browse the magazine racks. There's entire sections dedicated to health and fitness, to raising children, finanaces, etc etc etc. But I want to be able to choose what is best for me as an individual. I would read some magazines about health, and make a decision. I don't want some people halfway across the country telling me what I can and cannot do with my body. I want to know how you think that's just.

these same studies prove also that weed isn't healthy to use at any age.

And? Neither are Doritos, or Mountain Dew, or McDonalds, or working too hard at the gym or any number of other, completely legal, things. This isn't about health. It's about choice. I want to be able to choose what I do with myself. The government is saying no. What gives them this right?

sure it has medicinal advantages, but the abuse of this natural substance is what's keeping it illegal. Government would love to tax your stash, they'd make a hell of a lot more money that way. so why don't they? because it's too dangerous and unhealthy and the countries health is obviously important. don't think they don't care about your childs health.....what about the removal of vending machines at many schools, or the government mandated fitness tests? they do care, however as a parent your responsible for your kid, his actions, and his behaviors. since school is a state government runned institution (at least in Texas it is) they just wants to see that children in their care are healthy. During the 8 hours of school they want to help parents. the same parents that work more hours then anyone else in the world, and might be stuck in traffic until dark, or could it be, might come home tired?

If they are incapable of having children, but have them anyway, then why is it my fault? Why am I being punished because some moron somewhere didn't realize that taking care of another human being is hard work? Is it my fault they work such long hours? Is it my fault they don't use public transit? No, it's not.
So why am I being punished?

[Corey]

I don't know... maybe because parents don't want their kids exposed to that sort of behavior.

I did say that I would be in the basement, while toking up. There is no "exposure" involved. Also, I don't care. If parents don't want their children drinking, then they need to sit down with their child and actually parent them. It's not my job to parent everyone else's child. I didn't make the decision to have a child, I should not be held accountable for anyone else's decision to have a child.

I would like to know the chances of you getting caught and thrown in jail from toking up alone in your basement? I'm willing to wager slim to none. The governement knows people do this and they don't seek them out. The government's main course is to take out the dealers, the very ones that sell it to children. However, the connection can be made that your smoking of pot is what helps keep such dealers in business, and therefore are supporting its cause.

I agree, parents need to take more responsibility for their kids. But many parents do a crappy job and the ones who pay are the children. Kids didn't ask for that. This is why we have public schools. Not everyone can afford school for their kids and it wouldn't be fair to deny an education to kids as punishment for something that is out of their control.

[Bandalero]

maybe because before the age of 21, alcohol affects growth, and smoking before 18 isn't a very healthy thing to do. says who? the government? how about independent studies, studies that parents can't do on their own.

And where, exactly, did I say I wanted people to stop reading independent studies? Gogo independent studies! But if I read the independent study, and decide for me that I want to smoke, or drink, or whatever, then what right do you have to make me stop? Sitting in my basement, not bothering anyone at all, I start toking up and drinking a beer. I want a specific reason that this affects you, and should be illegal.

but you can decide. you decide to break a law, that's fine we all do it. when you get caught, you only have yourself and your actions to blame. your not going to get caught doing it in your basement, and no one is gonna come looking for you unless someone tips the cops off. the only way someone would tip you off is because your bothering them. this isn't a neighborhood from the 50's where you had neighbors that looked out for one another and took care of all the kids. privacy fences, air conditioning and Television make people stay indoors and mind their own buisness. so your in the clear.

yeah parents should be completely accountable for their children, however how are they gonna know when it's safe for their child to engage in drinking or smoking?

They read the studies. Whee.
There's clearly a market out there to inform people of what is healthy for them. Go to the bookstore, and browse the magazine racks. There's entire sections dedicated to health and fitness, to raising children, finanaces, etc etc etc. But I want to be able to choose what is best for me as an individual. I would read some magazines about health, and make a decision. I don't want some people halfway across the country telling me what I can and cannot do with my body. I want to know how you think that's just.

exactly, but of course who goes around looking for reading material? how about if the government told people that were gonna regulate the age of the consumer of a certain prouduct. like i said, you can do what ever you want, just deal with getting caught when you do get caught. you think your smart enough to outsmart authorities or you think your old enough to participate in these events then go for it.

these same studies prove also that weed isn't healthy to use at any age.

And? Neither are Doritos, or Mountain Dew, or McDonalds, or working too hard at the gym or any number of other, completely legal, things. This isn't about health. It's about choice. I want to be able to choose what I do with myself. The government is saying no. What gives them this right?

heh, considering that the government took out vending machines in alot of schools, i say they're reading the same studies that you are. since type 2 diabeties and other obese(sp) related sicknesses have skyrocketed in elementary schools, they can do this because they offer insurance for these kids through the school systems. and if a parent were to buy this insurance and the kids comes down with type 2 diabeties, then that's an expense they cound have done without if they had only offered a better diet in their cafeterias. it's not like they're comming into peoples houses and making them eat better, just in their state runned schools.

sure it has medicinal advantages, but the abuse of this natural substance is what's keeping it illegal. Government would love to tax your stash, they'd make a hell of a lot more money that way. so why don't they? because it's too dangerous and unhealthy and the countries health is obviously important. don't think they don't care about your childs health.....what about the removal of vending machines at many schools, or the government mandated fitness tests? they do care, however as a parent your responsible for your kid, his actions, and his behaviors. since school is a state government runned institution (at least in Texas it is) they just wants to see that children in their care are healthy. During the 8 hours of school they want to help parents. the same parents that work more hours then anyone else in the world, and might be stuck in traffic until dark, or could it be, might come home tired?

If they are incapable of having children, but have them anyway, then why is it my fault? Why am I being punished because some moron somewhere didn't realize that taking care of another human being is hard work? Is it my fault they work such long hours? Is it my fault they don't use public transit? No, it's not.
So why am I being punished?

but they are, that's why they work, to provide for their families. they work to take care of their own families so that you won't have to with increased taxes.

[Corey]

precisely. i am comfortable letting him roam free until i find him. and i am comfortable dealing out justice. i am just as fit to decide his fate as any jury of his peers - we are all human beings after all with none of us having any more divine judgement then the others.

So you are free to kill anyone you presume to be a violator of your rights? Your wife is murdered, and you think Joe did it but you don't need to bother to present evidence so you shoot him in the head. That is justice?

What if Joe accidentally stepped on your $10 salmon bush. You tell him to pay for it and he refuses. Your only option for compensation is to kill him. The punishment for every violation is death I guess. The very thing you condemn the government of doing.

[mosaik]

to quote the almighty mad dog of the str forums:

"any encroachment on my liberty is punishable by death"

if Joe destroys my property and then refuses to compensate me accordingly, he is acting irrationaly. I do not have to tolerate irrational behavior if i live in a rational society.

as for presenting evidence, who do i need to prove my case too? if i know the guy did it, he's going to die. if i don't know that it was him, then i won't shoot him. simple as that.

[Corey]

emotions will take over.. you think he did it, you will shoot him.

[mosaik]

and now we're just speculating about a "what if"

can't we get back to the theory?

[Narbus]

but you can decide. you decide to break a law, that's fine we all do it. when you get caught, you only have yourself and your actions to blame. your not going to get caught doing it in your basement, and no one is gonna come looking for you unless someone tips the cops off. the only way someone would tip you off is because your bothering them. this isn't a neighborhood from the 50's where you had neighbors that looked out for one another and took care of all the kids. privacy fences, air conditioning and Television make people stay indoors and mind their own buisness. so your in the clear.

First off, I have the law to blame. The law that treats me like an idiot incapable of any kind of personal responsibility.
Second off, I didn't say I wanted the odds, or how to skirt the law, I wanted to know why it was illegal.

exactly, but of course who goes around looking for reading material?

Yes. By all means. Let's reward the idiots. That's a great way to encourage personal and intellectual growth in people. Reward them for staying stupid.

how about if the government told people that were gonna regulate the age of the consumer of a certain prouduct. like i said, you can do what ever you want, just deal with getting caught when you do get caught. you think your smart enough to outsmart authorities or you think your old enough to participate in these events then go for it.

Missing the point. I don't want to be able to be caught. I want to be able to make my own decisions and not have someone who's never even met me before making them for me. What gives you the right to tell me that things I do that don't affect you are wrong?

heh, considering that the government took out vending machines in alot of schools, i say they're reading the same studies that you are.

You know what this means? This means that government put the machines in the schools in the first place. Good work, government.

since type 2 diabeties and other obese(sp) related sicknesses have skyrocketed in elementary schools, they can do this because they offer insurance for these kids through the school systems. and if a parent were to buy this insurance and the kids comes down with type 2 diabeties, then that's an expense they cound have done without if they had only offered a better diet in their cafeterias. it's not like they're comming into peoples houses and making them eat better, just in their state runned schools.

First, "runned?"
Second, this tells me that the government doesn't give a shit about our kids, and really cares about the cash they're losing.
Third, I still don't care. Leave the machines in. If I were a parent, I'd teach my kid to not eat crap for lunch.

but they are, that's why they work, to provide for their families. they work to take care of their own families so that you won't have to with increased taxes.

Yet here I am, still being taxed. Clearly that's not working.

Also, so American's work longer days. So what? I can't seem to find any studies saying that Spaniards, or the French are somehow going hungry or are unable to provide for their children because they don't work the same long hours we're expected to. This is a problem with the way we are expected to work. If we quit taxing people so much (by cutting the intrusion of government in our daily lives) then people won't have to work as much, so they'll get to spend more time with their kids. Yay. Everyone wins.

Here's the sum of it. People are told "give us more money," by the government. To make up for it, they work more. The government is then asked to actually spend some of our own money to provide for our children while we work these extra hours. So the government needs more money. From us. Which takes more time away from home, which means we need more governmental aid, and so on. It doesn't work. We need something new.

[Bandalero]

but you can decide. you decide to break a law, that's fine we all do it. when you get caught, you only have yourself and your actions to blame. your not going to get caught doing it in your basement, and no one is gonna come looking for you unless someone tips the cops off. the only way someone would tip you off is because your bothering them. this isn't a neighborhood from the 50's where you had neighbors that looked out for one another and took care of all the kids. privacy fences, air conditioning and Television make people stay indoors and mind their own buisness. so your in the clear.

First off, I have the law to blame. The law that treats me like an idiot incapable of any kind of personal responsibility.
Second off, I didn't say I wanted the odds, or how to skirt the law, I wanted to know why it was illegal.

cause you are an idiot. then again so am i and everyone else. it's unhealthy to put that shit in your system, but you do it anyway. same goes for me and alcohol, that's why government wants to curve the amount of booze i can drink before i get in trouble.
of course your shit is worse only because your habbit is creating this demand that not only is illegal, but is killing women/children in mexico. you could blame the government for it's restrictions, but it all comes down to your habbit to something that isn't good for you.

exactly, but of course who goes around looking for reading material?

Yes. By all means. Let's reward the idiots. That's a great way to encourage personal and intellectual growth in people. Reward them for staying stupid.

you are rewarded, as am i. cause were idiots.

how about if the government told people that were gonna regulate the age of the consumer of a certain prouduct. like i said, you can do what ever you want, just deal with getting caught when you do get caught. you think your smart enough to outsmart authorities or you think your old enough to participate in these events then go for it.

Missing the point. I don't want to be able to be caught. I want to be able to make my own decisions and not have someone who's never even met me before making them for me. What gives you the right to tell me that things I do that don't affect you are wrong?

everyone answers to someone/something. employees to bosses, kids to parents, humans to some sort of belief that they want to hold themselves too. you think that just because your you that you can run around and do whatever the hell you want thinking it's not affecting anyone but yourself, your wrong. remember your habbit is killing women in Mexico, and no matter how you cut it, it all comes down to your habbit.

heh, considering that the government took out vending machines in alot of schools, i say they're reading the same studies that you are.

You know what this means? This means that government put the machines in the schools in the first place. Good work, government.

no the school did, they get offered contracts for money and equipment if they sell their and only their product. i'm sure you've seen a scoreboard or two at your school that has some sort of product logo. it's free money and equipment, i'd take it too.

since type 2 diabeties and other obese(sp) related sicknesses have skyrocketed in elementary schools, they can do this because they offer insurance for these kids through the school systems. and if a parent were to buy this insurance and the kids comes down with type 2 diabeties, then that's an expense they cound have done without if they had only offered a better diet in their cafeterias. it's not like they're comming into peoples houses and making them eat better, just in their state runned schools.

First, "runned?"
Second, this tells me that the government doesn't give a shit about our kids, and really cares about the cash they're losing.
Third, I still don't care. Leave the machines in. If I were a parent, I'd teach my kid to not eat crap for lunch.

heh...money talks bullshit walks. if they can save money while investing in an education for a student then they'll try and cut costs. has the student lost anything signifigant if these products are gone? no, because most of these corporate contracts with these schools don't pay for the books or the light bills, just other equipment not essential for academics.

but they are, that's why they work, to provide for their families. they work to take care of their own families so that you won't have to with increased taxes.

Yet here I am, still being taxed. Clearly that's not working.
Also, so American's work longer days. So what? I can't seem to find any studies saying that Spaniards, or the French are somehow going hungry or are unable to provide for their children because they don't work the same long hours we're expected to. This is a problem with the way we are expected to work. If we quit taxing people so much (by cutting the intrusion of government in our daily lives) then people won't have to work as much, so they'll get to spend more time with their kids. Yay. Everyone wins.
Here's the sum of it. People are told "give us more money," by the government. To make up for it, they work more. The government is then asked to actually spend some of our own money to provide for our children while we work these extra hours. So the government needs more money. From us. Which takes more time away from home, which means we need more governmental aid, and so on. It doesn't work. We need something new.

actually it is working, because you, along with everyone else that pays taxes, are FREE to reap the benifits of these programs that everyone funds with their tax money. you don't have kids, hey you don't need as much, you have a higher salary, then you can afford to put into these programs a little more. that's the way it works here, find me something else that will work alot better, and work with your political cronnies to chage things. there are other ways, one in particular that i know of where everyone works for the government, get paid atleast $80,000, and you have health insurance. the only thing you can't do there is complain about the government, because you'll be killed. Quatar would be a kick ass place to live, but you, me and everyone else here in the states woundn't hack it. (or so i'm told by students from Quatar) because that seems to be our wonderful pastime.....bitch about the government. true france and spain aren't filled with starvation, but they're not lush asses like people from the US. that's why people hate us, were arrogant, were wasteful, we have fat spoiled kids we don't take care of, were lazy?, were assholes that have interests in the rest of the world. in other words, we work hard, we play hard. we earned it all, the haters, the friends, and most of all the right to bitch about minor things in life.