How about casually sprinkled as a kind of pixie femtonuke-bomb-dust over
the military compounds?
"...It has been suggested that the materials might be constructed to
allow all of the stored energy to be released very quickly in a 'burst'.
The density of gammas produced in this reaction would be high enough
that it might allow them to be used to compress the fusion fuel of a
fusion bomb. If this turns out to be the case, it might allow a fusion
bomb to be constructed with no fissile material inside (eg. a pure
fusion weapon), and it is the control of the fissile material and the
means for making it that underlies most attempts to stop nuclear
proliferation. In fact, the possible energy release of the gammas alone
would make IGE a potential high power 'explosive' on its own, or a
potential radiological weapon. Basic research remains in early stages
but that has not deterred the worrying about these possibilities."
Depends on what you mean by "education". If you mean teaching children
about rights and responsibilities, then yes. If you mean teaching
children about something else, say the idea of "from each according to
his ability, to each according to his need", then no...
Hel-OOO? How on earth do you get Marxism from *anything* that i wrote?
I have consistently talked about teaching critical thinking skills (and
yes, some kids are born with an advantage in htat area, however, as with
reading and arithmetic and basic math, many skills can also be taught so
as to give them abasic level of competency). i have *never* said anything
whatsoever about Marxism. The last time I thought Marxism made sense was
when I was 11, and even there, it was mainly a rebellion thing, not a
political or philosophical stance. I had to study it to some extent
because of my focus on the SOviet Union and subsequent job, and it's
So don't bring in that old "red herring" nonsense. =>:-p I've been IMO
quite clear about what I've meant by "education".
Not to mention that a so-called "Marxist division" does not necessarily
equate with Marxism, unless snidely stated or manipulated as the above.
Somebody pulled somebody's red button. It has been considered polite
for decades to propose, for example, a Marxist division when it comes to
dating. First, no one is denigrated because one of the parties decides
to go somewhere less affordable to the other and secondly, the person
with a lower salary (your date could be interning at a low salary, for
example) has the dignity of paying his/her share. It's basically a
statement of situation and takes the status of salary out of the
equation. Of course, it presumes that the couple dating knows enough
about each others' salaries - ya gotta be good enough friends for that.
Teaching teenagers how to calculate the cost of their desires and still
include other people is a worthy discussion
That made my head hurt!
OTOH, I really never did, and still don't, "get' a lot fo that social-
status crap. Sure, i'd get more "social status" if I got that 500-series
Beemer to park inmy driveway, btu the thing disn't fit my butt so I stuck
with my 'crappy old basic Saturn" (got it in 2001, so it's really not
that old, and it's basic, no power windows, but not *that* crappy,
sinceit does get me from Point A to Point B, and teh A/C/ works).
If I have more $$ than my friend, and choose to enjoy my $$ by taking him
somewhere he's never been, or hell, maybe by giving him a coupel hundred
bucks, I don't see any sort of "power" or "inequity" or "lack of
dignity" in it, it' ssimply that sometimes, I really enjoy seeing a
friend have a great time.
SO all of that "Marxist Division" stuff just blows right by me - I don't
IMO, it's just a matter of enjoyment. If your enjoyment *harms* someone
else, that is wrong. OTOH, is Brittany Speas makes $700K a month, and
spends every last penny of it, uh, so what? It doesn't affect me, or
It comes down to whether one is harming someone else, and how. If someone
else is simply jealous, or peeved, or even "offended", that isn't harm,
and isn't relevant. ((Sure I'm a little envious that I don't have $700K
<LOL!> but it ain't harming me...))
As for including others, well, if someone is your friend, or anyone you
care about, you like to spend time with them, share expereinces, share
things you enjoy. You include each other in your respective lives.
Including anyone else is neitehr necessary, nor autiomatically desireable
- even if you're doing volunteer work, there has to be a line between
that work, and your degree of personal (and financial) involvement.
Without that line, that boundary, you get eaten alive, because there is
never any end to people claiming tha tthey "need" your time, yoor
emotional investment, your stuff, yoru money, etc. and so on.
I didn't... but I did get it from some kids I know in the public
education system. That's what they're being taught. "Fairness" is more
important that knowing how to multiply. Being a good citizen is
stressed over being able to read and reason. That's where it came from.
I was agreeing with you conditionally.
I am constantly amazed at how we can provide tax incentives to outsource
jobs from the US that we aren't providing for our own educated and
At the last Smithsonian Folklife Festival, there was a table in which
the Irish were showing how they provide support services for US
companies. They were assuming, in their literature and spiels that
these were jobs that Americans would not want to take. They were
dismayed to note person after person ask how they could get that job at
that salary, asking things like "Do I have to move to Ireland?" or "Can
you link me for this job from my house?".
The Irish were glad to do "thos jobs you Americans don't want to do.
And the setup consts were financed by your government. We are
grateful." (At least, that's how I remember the conversation )
Lot's of sides to the issue. NO tax incentives for creating jobs here
Actually, my friend has been trying to hire some US company to do some
pharmaceutical-production work, but ended up having to turn to a Eurpean
company, because the US companies were run by US-"educated" nitwits who
simply could not do the work. ((It's an injectible product, so the mfg
quality has to be very rigorously controlled.))
When I talk about poor education, including lack of critical/logical
thinking skills, impacting a society, I'm not just blithering - a poor-
quality education makes for poor-quality workers. It's pathetic to be
*forced* to out-source so as to find people with the appropriate skill-
Education is not the same thing as the current mess called "the public
school system". The current ssytem is a bureaucracy first, and second, and
third, and is more of a trianing camp, than an Educational Institution.
I've said time and time again that I am willing to pay for children to be
*educated* - I am *not* w8illing to pay for them to be merely warehoused
for 8 hours and trained to follow orders.
Merely being a "good littel worker bee" is not condusive to liberty - but
being a GLWB is precisely what the "educational" bureaucracy seeks to
A great many HS Graduates can barely read, can barely do basic arithmetic,
and can barely think well enough to drive a car. That is not education. I
agree with Pat that Education is a natural right, and that this rightr is
being denied students.
I really wish people would stop confusing "education" with "warehousing".
Natural rights are those that exist outside of another individual. A
"right" to be educated exists in the same way that the right to pursue
happiness exists. However, there is no obligation to provide for that
For example, I have the right to bear arms. But I do not have the right
to steal from you to buy my gun (or steal your gun). Education works
the same way. As soon as you take from another, by force, the money
required to educate another person, you've violated that first person's
right to property. Rights also do not require the violation of other
rights to exist.
Extending this to public education. If, we volunteer our money to a
"public" school, then we have not violated anyones rights. As soon as
they attach the rule of force to that (for example, property taxes), our
right to property has been violated, no matter that the purpose may be
noble, like enabling children to have the right to be educated.
The right to a good education is only being denied to the students in
that their parents are not insistent that their children get a good
education and do something about it. It is our right to property that
is being violated and this is of greater concern than the poor education
of students (I think they're related. Don't teach people properly and
they won't understand the difference between right, privilege and tough
luck. They'll start asserting rights where they don't exist and giving
away the ones that do).
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.