Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (12626)	5/10/2002 1:48:38 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

Perhaps you do not understand, but in the United States, most educational funding is at the municipal level. Although the Department of Education does provide a modest amount of school funding, one could dispense with the Department and continue to have modest federal involvement in education within a much smaller bureau, or simply disperse funds through revenue sharing programs in other departments.......

To: Solon who wrote (12626)	5/10/2002 1:54:28 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

That would depend on whether it was public or private housing. AH! I see! So if it's public housing, that means the gov't cut the trees, sawed the wood, forged the nails, made the glass, ..... Interesting. WRONG. But interesting. I think there is a drunkenness problem. But it isn't in the private sector. So you think that all education should be privately funded, eh?! I Vouchers, dear sir, vouchers. I like women who know how to be alluring. Then pray tell, just what are these useless businesses you keep ranting about? Name them, please.

To: Solon who wrote (12626)	5/10/2002 2:40:21 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 21057

I agree with Laz that the department of education should be shut down. You can do that with or without moving to an all private system. The department of education only accounts for a small (but growing) percentage of the public money spent on education. I also think social security is a ponzi scheme but I would rather not ignore the commitments we made to people. Some of these people are already retired and dependent on the income from this program. It never should have been set up, or at least it should not have been set up in anything like its current form, but phasing it out is going to be complex and difficult. I don't see how a whole department for labor is needed. I think the federal government involvement in this area should be a lot smaller. Maybe an office of labor with a lot less staff and less responsibility. I don't like a lot of what the EPA does, or more specifically how it does it, but I think that there is some need for environmental regulation, so I would not seek to get rid of the EPA. Tim