namelesstavern.net

And Ron Paul begins to shine thru.....


what's really scary? look at the posted PDF reports on the spending plans, you will see some of the items listed as "cost unknown"....

I don't know if he has a chance to do anything anymore unless he starts to win primaries now. By the way, here in CA, Schwarzenegger just endorsed McCain.

i saw that... apparently Ron is concentraiting on super tuesday. kinda smart if you ask me. holding on to his cash till the weak candidates get weeded out. None of the rest can hold a candle to him Demapublican or Republicrat.

What would be really great is a Nancy Reagan endorsement, though that might be a bit controversial for some and rather hard to acquire with her very anti-drug stance and her stances in the past on gun control

At the republican debate it seemed Huckabee was gunning for her endorsement with his lips planted firmly on her ass, though.

At any rate, I think Paul is the closest to emulate Reagan's stances out of all of the candidates currently, and the fact that he actually worked closely with him doesn't hurt.

I still don't think it's over for Paul - I think it'll take one hell of a campaign and an amazing comeback on Super Tuesday, but I think that Super Tuesday is what he's been gunning for and that he's played rather smart up to this point - he stays out of the pettiness that the other candidates seem to enjoy, and hasn't squandered his funding gunning for one state so much as collectively focusing on a larger populace

see Rudy Giuliani for an example on a total waste of funding on one state - see Romney as well, all the money he spent on FL and got nothing out of it with it being a winner-take-all. What a joke. His supporters around here are such jerks too - we had a little old lady who's an avid Rudy supporter put up her sign, within 5 minutes they took it down and hid it in an office he had rented out for a call center. They were here giving out hot dogs and rented this GINORMOUS office space; walking in there was just disgusting, it was what I imagine a Dell Tech support office to look like.

The best thing Paul supporters can do for him right now is donate to his campaign (and obviously campaign heavy in those states with upcoming voting) - he has promised his supporters that so long as we're willing to help keep him afloat he won't back out of the race. He's got his benchmark he's setting for the 5th, and I really think he can make it.

Remember Jimmy Carter?

does it not bother you guys that Paul wants to spend 68 million LESS on education/science/research ?

Evermore wrote:Remember Jimmy Carter?

Admittedly I'm not totally in the know on him, but I do know that he came from behind.. what also needs to be noted with him is that he won both Iowa and NH, though, and Paul doesn't have that luxury atm.

Tikker wrote:does it not bother you guys that Paul wants to spend 68 million LESS on education/science/research ?

if you read the analysis, that's solely based on his desire to get rid of the federal Department of Education and give that power back to the states - that amount doesn't come from anywhere else but that.

Tikker wrote:does it not bother you guys that Paul wants to spend 68 million LESS on education/science/research ?

You left the rest of this off. He would put the control back in the state's and the parents hands, where it belongs.

Actually, Tikker, that's Billions, not Millions.

And giving "control" back to the states is questionable as to whether it would do any good (see: idiocies in Kansas board of education, and how bad local education is in places like rural Mississippi). But, schools all over the country depend on that money to operate. Where are they going to replace it without local areas drastically raising property taxes, etc? I doubt some poorer states would EVER be able to replace it, nor would California, due to Prop 13 limits.

Furthermore, what does that do to funding for colleges? How many millions of students will no longer be able to afford to go to college, because pell grants and guaranteed student loans no longer exist? That would be a national disaster of unprecedented proportions, leaving only the upper classes able to afford to go to school, which would, long term, pretty much wipe out the middle class, and eliminate most avenues of class advancements.

-Arlos

how many millions of foreigners wont be able to come over and have the US government pay for their schooling, just so they can return home and let their countries benefit? Or have them use the knowledge for more sinister purposes?

Obviously the whole thing would need to be transitioned and the details worked out. You could probably use gambling revenues in Mississippi to fund it. details would need to be hammered out. don't really see why this couldnt be a good thing.

Gypsiyee wrote:

Tikker wrote:does it not bother you guys that Paul wants to spend 68 million LESS on education/science/research ?

if you read the analysis, that's solely based on his desire to get rid of the federal Department of Education and give that power back to the states - that amount doesn't come from anywhere else but that.

you're right, I didn't read the whole thing, just quickly skimmed the tables, and it jumped out


in my brain tho, doesn't it make sense to have some sort of common education system across the country, rather than different standards in different states/counties?

Tikker wrote:does it not bother you guys that Paul wants to spend 68 million LESS on education/science/research ?

Honestly, either he spends less on stuff or we go bankrupt and it all goes away. It's time the government stopped being bad credit examples and buckled down.

Evermore wrote:how many millions of foreigners wont be able to come over and have the US government pay for their schooling, just so they can return home and let their countries benefit? Or have them use the knowledge for more sinister purposes?

HAHAHA oh man, yea everyone really wants a piece of that sweet American education system. Imagine what the terrorists could do with that?!?!

it's real damn sweet when compared to some of the poorer countries in the world. Your naïveté is showing once again. I suppose you think all terrorists are uneducated and assbackward. Kinda like you.

Here is an idea go try working in a college or a hosptial, you MIGHT have an inkling of a clue if you did.

Evermore wrote:I suppose you think all terrorists are uneducated and assbackward.

Actually no, that was my whole argument. I think they can get a better education in their own country. They don't need to sneak over hear to steal all your super secret 5th grade curriculum.

"We now know the molecular composition of Zinc! Death to the infidels!"

Actually, at the college level, foreign students don't get crap from the federal government. As foreigners here under student visas, they're not eligible for Pell grants or federal student loans, so any financial aid they're receiving comes from their home country or from the universities themselves. Not to mention, at least public universities charge foreign students far more than they charge even out-of-state students.

And again, I think at least SOME set of national standards for primary education is a GOOD thing. Otherwise you'll have places like Kansas decide they don't REALLY need biology, because trained biologists might believe in evolution, which would obviously be Of De Debil. Also, how would colleges handle admissions if every state had wildly different requirements for graduating high school?

-Arlos

Arlos wrote:Furthermore, what does that do to funding for colleges? How many millions of students will no longer be able to afford to go to college, because pell grants and guaranteed student loans no longer exist? That would be a national disaster of unprecedented proportions, leaving only the upper classes able to afford to go to school, which would, long term, pretty much wipe out the middle class, and eliminate most avenues of class advancements.

God forbid people actually pay for their children's educations, let alone make the kid work while going to school!

We'd see a rise in people actually deserving to get a college degree rather than the perpetuation of the degree mills that currently exist.

The quality of post secondary educations would rise rather than decline and a degree might actually be worth something in this day & age.

-Adam

10sun wrote:

Arlos wrote:Furthermore, what does that do to funding for colleges? How many millions of students will no longer be able to afford to go to college, because pell grants and guaranteed student loans no longer exist? That would be a national disaster of unprecedented proportions, leaving only the upper classes able to afford to go to school, which would, long term, pretty much wipe out the middle class, and eliminate most avenues of class advancements.

God forbid people actually pay for their children's educations, let alone make the kid work while going to school!

We'd see a rise in people actually deserving to get a college degree rather than the perpetuation of the degree mills that currently exist.

The quality of post secondary educations would rise rather than decline and a degree might actually be worth something in this day & age.

-Adam

Yeah, because so many families with both working parents have so much left over money that they can afford a $60K education for each of their 3 children.

There's shitloads of families that cannot afford to pay for kids to go to school. Plus, given the current cost of tuitions, the time where someone could work and still go to school full time and pay for it all AND pay for room, board, etc. without any financial aid is going byebye. Not to mention, most college classes are offered weekday, during the day. What kind of well-paying job is someone going to find that works around that schedule, yet still provides enough hours? Not to mention, how much time is someone going to have to actually internalize what they're learning if they're going to school for 15-20 hours a week, working 40 hours, and then having to do shit tons of homework and projects on top of that?

Hell, even WITH federal help tuitions are getting out of control. Cal State colleges are raising tuitions 25% next year because of state budget problems, and to fund massive raises for university presidents.

No, if you want a society to succeed, you need as many highly trained and educated people as you can get. Going to college should be a right, not a privilege. It's not just a benefit to the individual, it's a benefit to society AND businesses as well.

-Arlos

personally, I kinda think that if you can't outright afford to go to college, you trade the military X number of years of service for your college education

That works for some people, but hardly everyone. What about people who's ethics code would prevent joining the military? More importantly, what about people with medical conditions that would prevent them from joining? Those conditions can be as simple as moderately serious asthma, or having blown out a knee playing sports, they don't have to be something as major as being permanently in a wheelchair or anything of that ilk. (during Vietnam, my dad was a full-time college student, but even if he wasn't, he was exempt from the draft because the military doctors rated him as 4F because of asthma.) Hell, what about people who are openly gay? They sure as hell aren't eligible for the US military, but there's no reason they should be excluded from going to college.

So, sure, going into the military and having them pay for school IS an option, but it's not an option for everyone, nor should it be the ONLY option.

-Arlos

Ron Paul put himself through undergrad, medical school and all three children through school without tax subsidized loans.

Yeah, after my experiences with the military, I lost any and all respect for how it is run and became a pacifist.

My Mom has been a waittress all her life at the same restaurant. My Dad died in 02, and if he had not had the life insurance policy he did, I don't know if I would have finished my degree. It certainly isn't cheap.

I wouldn't expect the government to help pay for it, though. My experiences in college with people who do get a lot of financial aid have led me to believe that a good amount of them, probably the majority, are poor students and that they wont amount to much anyways. Just because they're "getting an education" doesn't necessarily mean they'll be more productive in society. In fact, because they are getting so much aid, I wouldn't be surprised if they developed a mentality where they expect to get more handouts to make life easier--hardly motivation to better yourself. If people want it, they need to work for it, they need to sacrifice, they need to struggle, and they need to persevere.

There will always be rich kids getting by on Daddy's money, and no, it's not fair when you see them going off partying with their weekly "allowance" while the first generation college student works their ass off at two part time jobs. In my opinion, that doesn't give the government a right to budge in and help out the latter with taxpayer money, though. Trying to level the playing field only sounds good, it fails miserably in reality.

araby wrote:Ron Paul put himself through undergrad, medical school and all three children through school without tax subsidized loans.

And things were a LOT different in this country when he did so. It now takes two incomes in many parts of the country to even make ends meet, let alone pay for college.