Feds Arrest Two for Eagle Creek Arson (Oregon

I'm sure you have heard all the hoo-haw about the budget crisis in Oregon and I'm sure you have opinions to offer on that.But the assertion that schools could be better operated under a free enterprise system? Do we want our schools to be operated like Wal-marts,where everything is about cost? I seriously doubt that private enterprise would have an interest in offering more for less.You might end up like Wal-mart,where you have alot of plastic junk for less.Where would the motivation to pay teachers more come from,if profit was the driving force behind offering this"commodity"? We all know how to maximize profit,one way is to cut corners and forget maintenance,the other way is to offer a better quality product and hope the masses realise this and buy it.But quality products are more expensive,and the people who really need this product will not be able to afford it.Label me socialist or whatever you want.I care about those that could not afford to pay.

I suspected that you might be from Oregon. And, that is perfect -- because I live in Oregon City. hehehe. I'm quite intimate with the budget status here in Oregon -- where we have the 7th best funded public school system in the nation. They rant and rave about "stable" funding, but have had double digit increases in every budget for as far back as you can see. Our schools are literally awash in money and yet they are screaming for more. It is absolutely sickening.

You seem to be dissing Wal-Mart pretty heavily, but a great many people are more than happy to pay less for middle of the road quality, wide selection and consistent service. Wal-Mart is not the enemy that the Eugene anarchists pretend.

As far as teacher pay -- private enterprise would be light years ahead of the bloated and corrupt public employees union plantation mentality. As a matter of fact, private teachers already make more than public school teachers, even though the cost per pupil is about 1/3 of public school. Not only that, but in a private business, quality is rewarded and incompetence is removed. Try that in a public school. It just doesn't happen. Heck, right here in Oregon we changed the tenure law to 3-year revolving contracts, such that we can give a poor performing teacher 3-year notice that they are going to be removed. After the first 3-years they gave the notice to exactly zero teachers. Now, I know there are more than zero incompetent teachers in Oregon. I've met some of them. There's got to be at least one or two in the Portland district where the failure rate of students is shockingly high.

I really have no desire to label you. You should pick the label that best represents your position on ideological/philosophical issues. If socialism is where you fit, then so be it. However, if you care about children and you want them to have a chance to get a decent education, then there is NO WAY you can be a supporter of government schools.

It would seem as though the students that attend the existing private schools are ones that can afford to do so.

Well, that only stands to reason since those who choose to consume private school services end up paying twice. Once for the public schools they don't use, and again for the private school they do.

If there were only private schools,would every child be able to afford them? The ones who need it most?

School is a commodity like any other commodity. Food, clothing, transportation, housing, medical care. People who value it do what it takes to pay for it. People who don't value it -- dont'. Likewise, as a commodity, when the supply is insufficient, the price goes up and more competitors enter the market to service the demand. Quality is delivered according to price point. This is really economics 101 and easily understood by anybody who has a job outside of government.

Do we desire that much of a dog eat dog attitude towards the world.

Dog eat dog is when the government comes to my home with a gun and takes my money by force to pay for services that I don't want and other people consume. Dog eat dog is when my neighbor can vote to take more of my money to spend on things he wants, but won't work to pay for on his own. Socialism/Communism or any other form of collectivism is the true dog-eat-dog environment. Laissez-faire capitalism is the only moral system of economics. It is the only system whereby justice is honored and rights are respected. It is a system that our country was founded to embrace, but which we've corrupted over the decades.

Some of your logic makes good sense to me,and I'm listening.Oh,hey,isn't Wal-mart the ones who drive out small business,is this a good form of free enterprise?

There's nothing sacrosanct about a small business. It it cannot compete, then it needs to be pruned. Ask the low income family who needs to buy school supplies if they would rather pay three times as much to purchase it from an inefficient, but local, shop owner. Not to mention that a Wal-Mart is far more environmentally sound than spreading little shops all over the neighborhoods.

I'm not saying it's not legal what they are doing,I'm aware that to limit their ability to grow and expand would be a limitation on free enterprise,I'm just observing that it does not work out good for small business in the areas where they are doing business.

As I said, small businesses do not have the right to immunity from competition. Bear in mind that my father was a small business owner who eventually got pushed out by the mass merchandizers. He had a home appliance and electronics store. At the end, people could buy items from Costco cheaper than he could get them from his own wholesaler. He understands that it was his mistake for not staying in tune with the market in which he operated. He closed his eyes and assumed that things would never change. Then, when they did, he was out of luck. That's not a bad thing. Consumers got what they wanted and manufacturers got what they wanted, and ultimately the less competitive enterprise was weeded out.

When citizens vote to not let them build in their towns,I think they are smart to do so.Good info on the school expenditures though-I'll study the whole situation more.You ought to be teaching!

When citizens vote to keep them out, they vote to violate the rights of others. There is nothing more destructive or shortsighted. Consider that when you concede the power to the rabble to violate the rights of a rich man, you also concede the same power to the rabble to destroy your life if they should be so inspired. Rights are reflexive. When you deny them to another, you lose any claim to them yourself. That's why we must be very, very careful about the laws we pass.

As for me being a teacher -- I think not. I work in the high tech industry because it is currently the least controlled by socialism and the most like a free market. There is no other industry where I could hold a high level and high compensation position with only a high school degree and 20 years of good experience.

Ones that don't value it don't? Because their parents don't value education,certain children must suffer? This is a very callous attitude in my opinion.Sure the ones attending private schools are paying twice,but at this point that's their choice.When it gets to the point where only children whose parents have the ability to afford whatever education costs are able to get an education,then we're going to have a hell of a prison population on our hands.We don't have to go to a socialist society to have basic necessitys met for our citizens.Maybe all the money that goes to corporate welfare might help,for starters.
Your point about Wal-mart being more enviornmentally friendly:shops spread out all over actually encourages people to shop right in their neigborhood,instead of driving clear across town,clogging up the streets and burning alot of fuel.It may be harder to know the enviornmental practices of all the small shops though,that's true,it's hard to tell what they are dumping down the drain.
No, small business does not have a right to immunity from competition.I guess I am a fool for always pulling for the small guy. But when communitys decide to bar sprawlmarts from coming in,it's less "rabble" exercising their power over them in the future they have to worry about,rather it's the sprawlmart ruining their community's ambience,creating more traffic problems etc..
Good discussion though-thanks for taking the time.I've enjoyed it.We don't agree on much,but if we did,I'd have gotten bored long ago.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.