[The One and Only...]

Originally Posted by The_Rorschach

Lah DE fucking dah. With compelling arguments like THAT, its amazing anyone has the audacity to stand up to you.

Her point was from a purely opinionated perspective. As such, I did not feel the need to throw in proven results.

Do have any relevent facts, or do you use shallowly based opinion to justify all your arguments. Probably against some law or another? Christ, you can't be bothered to even check and see? And how, pray tell, would such legislation "drastically" harm the school's reputation?

Considering that this is a new idea, legislature would probably pass a few standards that all "public" schools would have to abide by. I imagine that a list of what would lead to something so high as being expelled would be written i.o.w. I doubt that these schools would be permitted to kick people out based on grades.

Would you really want to send your child to a school where they kicked students about because they couldn't achieve a B average? That is what I mean by hurting their reputation.

You're a complete and utter shitwit. . .No really. Left Wingers don't think privitizing is the answer eh? And we are to accept this on your authority alone? No statistics on tendancies and trends present within Leftist programs and propositions, or even a cut and paste sentence or two just. . .Your pronunciation, ex cathedra.

There are some things that are just common knowledge. I don't see many people who identify themselves as leftists supporting the abolition of public schools. Besides, it was the extreme left that proposed the idea of private property not existing.

Public Works and other various Gov't job programs came about in response to the Great Depression, Nimrod. 'Some theorize' . . .Some what? Some freebasing crack addicts perhaps? Since stock prices are based on estimates of future earnings, the stock market crash of 1929 was perhaps one of the largest contributions to the economic unheavel of the 30s. The inflation of commodity prices following World War I has had alot to do with it, since it prompted Mr. Strong of the US Federal Reserve Bank of New York to raise interest rates sharply to check that inflation which in turn caused recession and led to stock market failure. Mostly, however, it was the 1927 British Gold frenzy though. For someone with Murray as their avatar, one might expect a bit more economic saaviness.

For someone who actually recognized Murray, you would think they knew more about him. Murray himself proposed that government interferance in the economy was the main cause of the Depression. To quote a review of his book, America's Great Depression, he believed that "unsound policies of the central bank set the economy off on an unsustainable growth path in the 1920s, creating the conditions for the crash at the end of that decade. Attempts on the part of the executive and legislative branches to undo or mitigate the damage only made matters worse. The excesses of the twenties, the eventual downturn, and the dramatic slide into deep depression are all traced to governmental disruptions of the market process."

I have yet to find any serious critique of his book, and is a classic economical read in its 5th edition.

Well there you have it, I'm certainly convinced.

I don't know about you, but I'm prone to working harder if I think I'm going to be out of some cash if I don't. Or if I'm going to lose my job to someone better at it.

BTW: Burbank - are you talking about private companies collecting taxes, or private companies receiving tax money? If the latter, can you provide some info?