The supreme court is just fine with undermining the constitution, undermining the rule of law, destroying the family, and creating special inegalitarian rights for minorities. But god forbid they should limit the power of the other two branches of government. If we have a revolution I want the privilege of pulling the gallows lever for Roberts. I assume there is too much competition ahead of me for both Ginsberg and Sotomayor.
Source date (UTC): 2014-06-29 07:27:00 UTC
[Y]eah…. I don’t make “should” or “belief” arguments. Sorry. If you wanna make people believe something, start a religion or cult like Rothbard did. If you want to create a stateless, private or anarchic polity, then you have to eliminate rational demand for the services provided by the state. To do that requires a high trust society. And the evidence is universally in my favor that it does. So the burden on the lunatic fringe, is to demonstrate that people will rationally join a low trust polity in the absence of strong central authority that suppresses retribution for unethical, immoral and conspiratorial actions. Because human beings demonstrate that they will commit acts of violence in retribution for unethical, immoral, and conspiratorial actions, just like they will for criminal actions. Just how it is.
[Y]eah…. I don’t make “should” or “belief” arguments. Sorry. If you wanna make people believe something, start a religion or cult like Rothbard did. If you want to create a stateless, private or anarchic polity, then you have to eliminate rational demand for the services provided by the state. To do that requires a high trust society. And the evidence is universally in my favor that it does. So the burden on the lunatic fringe, is to demonstrate that people will rationally join a low trust polity in the absence of strong central authority that suppresses retribution for unethical, immoral and conspiratorial actions. Because human beings demonstrate that they will commit acts of violence in retribution for unethical, immoral, and conspiratorial actions, just like they will for criminal actions. Just how it is.
UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES SHOULD WARRANTY THEIR PRODUCTS, AND WE SHOULD SUE THEM FOR THE FAILURE OF THEIR PRODUCTS TO PERFORM. [T]he state gives the universities protection from suits. For selling non-performing products. (But then, the government is a monopoly that forces us to buy its services too.) Q: “Should a college education be offered to all people or to just a certain group of people?” “Should” is an interesting question. “College Education” is a loose term. “Offered” is a questionable term. The data suggest we send way too many people to college and way too few people to apprenticeship programs. Just statistically speaking, if it takes a 110-115 IQ to complete liberal arts education that means that we should be only educating `10-20% of the population and the rest should get vocational training rather than liberal arts training. Now that said, if colleges and universities had to warrantee their products, rather than sell non performing products, say, by getting x% of your payroll for 30 years, then we could drop tuition fees altogether, loans altogether, and let universities borrow to cover float (receiveables) themselves. This would rapidly change the university system from just another parasitic quasi-governmental bureaucracy, to a market driven organization. University costs and administrative costs would plummet, and courses woukd be outcome oriented. This is the best idea for solving the problem of parasitic but useless university degrees. We know now that we learn nothing at university if value. All they do is sort and filter the population.
UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES SHOULD WARRANTY THEIR PRODUCTS, AND WE SHOULD SUE THEM FOR THE FAILURE OF THEIR PRODUCTS TO PERFORM. [T]he state gives the universities protection from suits. For selling non-performing products. (But then, the government is a monopoly that forces us to buy its services too.) Q: “Should a college education be offered to all people or to just a certain group of people?” “Should” is an interesting question. “College Education” is a loose term. “Offered” is a questionable term. The data suggest we send way too many people to college and way too few people to apprenticeship programs. Just statistically speaking, if it takes a 110-115 IQ to complete liberal arts education that means that we should be only educating `10-20% of the population and the rest should get vocational training rather than liberal arts training. Now that said, if colleges and universities had to warrantee their products, rather than sell non performing products, say, by getting x% of your payroll for 30 years, then we could drop tuition fees altogether, loans altogether, and let universities borrow to cover float (receiveables) themselves. This would rapidly change the university system from just another parasitic quasi-governmental bureaucracy, to a market driven organization. University costs and administrative costs would plummet, and courses woukd be outcome oriented. This is the best idea for solving the problem of parasitic but useless university degrees. We know now that we learn nothing at university if value. All they do is sort and filter the population.
UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES SHOULD WARRANTY THEIR PRODUCTS, AND WE SHOULD SUE THEM FOR THE FAILURE OF THEIR PRODUCTS TO PERFORM. [T]he state gives the universities protection from suits. For selling non-performing products. (But then, the government is a monopoly that forces us to buy its services too.) Q: “Should a college education be offered to all people or to just a certain group of people?” “Should” is an interesting question. “College Education” is a loose term. “Offered” is a questionable term. The data suggest we send way too many people to college and way too few people to apprenticeship programs. Just statistically speaking, if it takes a 110-115 IQ to complete liberal arts education that means that we should be only educating `10-20% of the population and the rest should get vocational training rather than liberal arts training. Now that said, if colleges and universities had to warrantee their products, rather than sell non performing products, say, by getting x% of your payroll for 30 years, then we could drop tuition fees altogether, loans altogether, and let universities borrow to cover float (receiveables) themselves. This would rapidly change the university system from just another parasitic quasi-governmental bureaucracy, to a market driven organization. University costs and administrative costs would plummet, and courses woukd be outcome oriented. This is the best idea for solving the problem of parasitic but useless university degrees. We know now that we learn nothing at university if value. All they do is sort and filter the population.
UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES SHOULD WARRANTY THEIR PRODUCTS, AND WE SHOULD SUE THEM FOR THE FAILURE OF THEIR PRODUCTS TO PERFORM. [T]he state gives the universities protection from suits. For selling non-performing products. (But then, the government is a monopoly that forces us to buy its services too.) Q: “Should a college education be offered to all people or to just a certain group of people?” “Should” is an interesting question. “College Education” is a loose term. “Offered” is a questionable term. The data suggest we send way too many people to college and way too few people to apprenticeship programs. Just statistically speaking, if it takes a 110-115 IQ to complete liberal arts education that means that we should be only educating `10-20% of the population and the rest should get vocational training rather than liberal arts training. Now that said, if colleges and universities had to warrantee their products, rather than sell non performing products, say, by getting x% of your payroll for 30 years, then we could drop tuition fees altogether, loans altogether, and let universities borrow to cover float (receiveables) themselves. This would rapidly change the university system from just another parasitic quasi-governmental bureaucracy, to a market driven organization. University costs and administrative costs would plummet, and courses woukd be outcome oriented. This is the best idea for solving the problem of parasitic but useless university degrees. We know now that we learn nothing at university if value. All they do is sort and filter the population.
REFORMULATION OF “WE MUST DEVELOP POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS FOR THE PEOPLE WE HAVE, NOT THOSE WE WISH WE HAD” “Observation of individual men would never have led to the formulation of the static conceptions upon which the democratic edifice is founded, such as justice, equality, fraternity, order. These are based not on the traits of living men but upon schemes for the aggrandizement of mere thought-creations – “humanity”- “mankind.” Indeed the “characteristics of men” – are something to be explained away, something to be overcome in the interests of “mankind.”” – Dora Marsden
REFORMULATION OF “WE MUST DEVELOP POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS FOR THE PEOPLE WE HAVE, NOT THOSE WE WISH WE HAD” “Observation of individual men would never have led to the formulation of the static conceptions upon which the democratic edifice is founded, such as justice, equality, fraternity, order. These are based not on the traits of living men but upon schemes for the aggrandizement of mere thought-creations – “humanity”- “mankind.” Indeed the “characteristics of men” – are something to be explained away, something to be overcome in the interests of “mankind.”” – Dora Marsden
REFORMULATION OF “WE MUST DEVELOP POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS FOR THE PEOPLE WE HAVE, NOT THOSE WE WISH WE HAD” “Observation of individual men would never have led to the formulation of the static conceptions upon which the democratic edifice is founded, such as justice, equality, fraternity, order. These are based not on the traits of living men but upon schemes for the aggrandizement of mere thought-creations – “humanity”- “mankind.” Indeed the “characteristics of men” – are something to be explained away, something to be overcome in the interests of “mankind.”” – Dora Marsden