This is about as stupid as ole "Buy a Shotgun Joe's" advice on armed self defense.
Joe Biden Claims U.S. ‘Obligation’ to Give Illegal Aliens Free Health Care
- Thread starter RugersGR8
- Start Date
Sounds good to me. Just don’t use taxpayers’ money to do it. Economic growth is not a legitimate purpose of government.
Not talking about economic growth but needed public services that have serious shortages. There is a nation wide shortage of teachers, nurses, LEOs and real scientist. Plus they should all pay the government back by working government jobs. Teachers and LEOs already do, nurses not so much. If they fail to complete the required work time they should have to pay back cash, with a penalty.
Government needs to get out of education, not continue to poison the market and drive up the costs. If government didn’t guarantee student loans, tuition would not be nearly as high as it is. Higher education has a limited supply. Artificially increasing demand through financial aid has driven prices to the astronomical levels they are at today. There are better ways to solve the problems you’re talking about without government intervention. Government should be a last resort to almost every problem.
Also, healthcare and science are not “public services.” And almost no police agencies require a four-year degree. Not even Norman PD, which has some of the highest requirements in Oklahoma, requires a four-year degree, or any education in criminal justice at all.
Last edited:
Tulsa PD requires a Bachelors.
https://www.tulsapolice.org/join-tpd/min-requirements.aspx
https://www.tulsapolice.org/join-tpd/min-requirements.aspx
Is the pay commensurate with their education compared to other cities of the same size that don't require a bachelor's degree?
I am not talking about guaranteed student loans for everyone, in fact I agree with you about that in most cases, but as it stands we are guaranteeing student loans for things that do not help society at all while the things we really need like teachers, LEOs, nurses and real scientist are always wanting for good people. To much money is being wasted on education that still has them asking "You want fries with that" not enough spent on the things we need.
As far as healthcare and science not being public services, in some cases they could easily be until the loan is payed off at which time the student could leave to find a private sector job. Public low cost clinics would save us money in the long run and so would in-house government scientist. Do you know how much is given out in grants every year to study piddly ****?
In the process of continuing education, at one time I got an Associates Degree in Liberal Studies. I had a friend who had a Bachelors degree in LS, and I quipped to her once that it authorized her to say, "Would you like fries with that?" She replied that my degree authorized me to say that, but ONLY under direct supervision.
I know what you’re talking about. But the negative consequences aren’t absent if you only use government to manipulate the education market for some areas of study. Government should not be involved in higher education. If there’s a long-term shortage of any profession whose services are in high demand, the most likely root cause is government (burdensome and unnecessary regulation, economic manipulation, etc.). So why add more government to the mix to try to fix the problem the government caused in the first place?
Government should not be funding science that doesn’t directly contribute to the exercise of government’s core functions. Government should not be providing healthcare services to anyone except those who receive it as a benefit of public employment (e.g. military) or to limit the impact of a public health emergency (e.g. offering vaccination for an epidemic disease to those who choose to be vaccinated). We should never have government-provided healthcare or government-conducted science as a public service, even if it saves money, because the non-monetary costs of government being involved in those things are devastating to a free society. But the fact is, even if it looks like it would save money, it wouldn’t. Increasing government involvement in any activity is almost a guarantee of increasing the economic cost of that thing versus the cost if government involvement were decreased.
Trust the market, not government “solutions.”
Last edited:
@RickN, our views on the roles of government are different enough that I don’t expect us to agree on this issue, and that’s okay. I’m just trying to provide another viewpoint that might get you and others thinking about alternative solutions to problems that don’t involve the terrible costs of government intervention. Other than the coming theocracy of God in person ruling on Earth, even the most minimal amount of government is a necessary evil, with an emphasis on evil. Man’s governments, including American government, are innately evil and always devolve into tyranny and oppression. It is inevitable. It never fails. So we must reduce and limit government involvement to the greatest extent possible while still enforcing the social contract.
“Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” – George Washington
“If human beings are fundamentally good, no government is necessary; if they are fundamentally bad, any government, being composed of human beings, would be bad also.” – Fred Woodworth
“That government is best which governs least.” – Henry David Thoreau
“Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” – George Washington
“If human beings are fundamentally good, no government is necessary; if they are fundamentally bad, any government, being composed of human beings, would be bad also.” – Fred Woodworth
“That government is best which governs least.” – Henry David Thoreau
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Whatever happen to Trumps proposal on legalizing suppressors without permit?
- Latest: red dirt shootist
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
