Let me sum our previous discussion in two lines:
Funked: "Public Education is Socialism"
banana: "But Public Education is Good, It Can't Be Socialist. I have refuted your argument."
I'm sure you can see the flaw in your reasoning.
If not, let me help you.
I didn't say public education was all bad. All I said is that it is a socialist policy. Let's look at the definition of socialism and how it relates to public education.
Webster:
Main Entry: so·cial·ism
Pronunciation: 'sO-sh&-"li-z&m
Function: noun
Date: 1837
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
1: ...governmental ownership and administration of the means of production [the schools] and distribution of goods [educational services]
CHECK2 b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production [teachers and schools] are owned and controlled by the state
CHECKIt's socialism dude.
I never argued that it was entirely bad, just that it was a socialist policy. Plenty of socialist policies have at least some good effects, which is why they are so seductive to voters and politicians. But the negative effects on the economy and on freedom and pursuit of happiness need to be considered too. 30% (the percentage of 2003 that the average American works as a slave to the government) is way too much. The way I see it, we are only 70% free.
