From: J. de Lyser (gd33463@glo.be)
Date: Fri Feb 07 1997 - 16:23:18 MST
At 04:31 7-02-97 +0100, Eivind Berge wrote:
>In Norway, we are in the process of spending billions of kroner on forcing
>all six-year-olds into school. Social democrats have always wanted the state
>to raise the children, and that is the only reason for doing this.
I guess Europe is integrating towards a european standard, and i was
looking at it from countries that were more socialist than yours before ?
The socialist ones decreasing their socialism, the more capitalist ones
increasing their socialist politics.
Education is a very difficult subject. I quit my studies to be a history
teacher partly for this reason (history in schools is used for many things
it shouldn't be used for, it keeps many outdated social processes alive)
I'm sure a system of private education can tremendously increase
productivity, as such a system would increase innovation times.
I see one problem: Social Mobility is one of the greatest productive forces
in our society. It is how the most suitable people get to fullfill the
right place in society. Take this away completely and i'm sure any society
will see the ECONOMIC consequences.
I'n The Netherlands they have one famous (expensive) Private school, Many
of the top functions in bussiness require graduation from this school. I
estimate about 10% of the people who graduate from these schools get these
functions (and hold them). The other 90% was subject to this expression:
'too stupid to study, yet too rich not to study...'
<irony>
Maybe social mobility could be guaranteed by having the six year old from a
poor family who wants an education, sign a contract with the school, where
he will work 20 years to pay off his debts to them. That would surely
increase individual freedom would it ? As you would have a CHOICE between
staying stupid, or becoming a contract labourer.
<irony>
Problem is that six year old could very well be the next einstein, but we
will never know in a system you advocate. I agree with you that our current
state education doesn't work, and indeed is indoctrinated, by all posible
ideas the state advocates, not just stimulating socialism, but nationalism,
far beyond what is needed for national identity.
>As to health care, public spending on it has not declined in Norway, but some
>more private clinics have come into being. But those few who can afford to
pay
>instead of waiting for years in the public system, are being looked down
on and
>considered unsolidaric. One newspaper compared private clinics to
prostitution;
My personal ethics on this:
If you worked for your (loads of) money yourself, you have all rights to
enjoy its benefits, as you have proven to be an invaluable exponent of your
society.
If however you are a stupid f*ck, who has never worked one day in his life,
but has rich parents, or fell onto some money some other way than by
his/her own ingenuity. Please get in line with the rest and run the same
risk of dying in the process of doing so.
>The national budget has a surplus of many billions because of the oil, and
these are being saved to ensure pensions in the future.
That's what you think, they'll increasingly go to Europe, unless your state
wants to get completely isolated economically that is. If your state is to
save any of that money for its people: Distribute it now over all your
citizens... Or better still: INVEST it in infrascructure, less you become
the perifery of Europe. (tunnel ?)
> when a commercial national TV station finally was allowed, the
>public broadcasting created a second channel and is going to raise the TV
>tax (a tax for *owning* a TV set). Until 1992 there was only one TV channel
>available to everyone, and it has been controlled by the Labor Party and has
>been instrumental in normalizing the population as social democrats.
Yep same thing happened in most of europe, also what happened eventually
was even with the increased govt support, the national tv channels couldn't
compete. The only thing that still the most watched program is the national
channels NEWS.
Germany has interesting anti monopoly laws on this: I think one tv channel
cannot own a similar second channel. Very interesting to avoid populist
situations like those that happened in Italy of late...
I wonder how many US companies contribute to both presidential canditates
campaign, in exhange for state contracts ?
I think free trade is the best way to go, but i also think taking only half
steps towards a political system (ie in this case: capitalism, without the
anarchist element) is going to be detrimental to overall productivity.
>Anyway, the "revolutionary elements" from the '60s and '70s are now >the
ones in power, and their ideals have IMO been implemented, democratically.
They are also the ones driving Mercedes' now and make enough to seriously
start doubting their own beliefs... ;-)
>If we had had a revolution, and a real communist system for a while, the
future might now have looked brighter. People do get dissatisfied under
communism, and then we could overturn it and introduce anarcho-capitalism.
> I will emigrate to the US ASAP.
Why ? Looks to me you'd be far happier in any ex-communist country.
J. de Lyser
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:44:09 MST