9-03-22 2:48 • Private vs. Public Schools and Everything
B: Our local paper prints the scores for the public school atheletic teams, but they don't print the private school scores. This is unfair.
J: Private schools just aren't on the same level as public schools.
D: You're right, they're not. They're much better.
That should be considered a problem.
D: Equality is unattainable when money is involved.
That should be considered a problem too. No one deserves a crappy education and it's not good for society either.
D: Of course public schools should have a standard to meet.
All education for children should be the best we can provide, public or private. We are the richest country in the world. The standards for our public schools could be better than private, if we chose.
D: All public schools should be the best we can provide, but if compared with a school that charges $40,000 a year per student, their budget for a basketball coach will be different than a publicly funded school.
That's not necessary. This country has plenty of money to afford great coaches and great everything else. We could have gold-plated stars for the charts, IF we chose to invest in something that matters - people, and the future.
Sophie: We all have to do our best with what we have. I have a 19 year old Toyota Matrix. That’s what I can afford. So many people have brand new BMWs, Mercedes or Teslas. That’s what they can afford. I can’t expect to get the same when I don’t have the means to pay for it.
The only way to “equalize” education is to limit private schools and universities in what they can spend their money on, and do you really think that’s fair? So because I can only afford an old Toyota others should be denied their BMWs and Teslas?
If you are suggesting that the United States can only afford an old Toyota, you are mistaken. We have produced more wealth than any other society, ever. Only our choices mean that we squander what we produce instead of investing it in our future.
Excellent education is not that expensive. We could easily afford to bring every public school up to a high enough standard to be effective, and then some, if we made it our priority.
Sophie: If you didn’t get that I was making an analogy, I can’t help you with that.
Your claim that the United States of America can only afford the "used Toyota" of education for most citizens is incorrect. We are the wealthiest nation in the world and if we cared about education we could afford at least a "new Nisson Sentra" education for every student. It would not have to be a "BMW or Tesla" education to be good enough to drive the future.
Sophie: The US may have tons of wealth, but it also has tons of expenses and unless your privy to them all, their importance and how they’re managed you really can’t comment on how it’s being distributed.
It's a matter of public record where the money is going.
Sophie: I really love how extremist left wingers want everything for free - and of the best quality, of course- and don’t even stop to think about where the means will come from. Because, of course, you don’t want to pay more taxes for it…
There are definitely a few who should be paying more taxes for it and they can afford it too.
Sophie: Excellent education IS expensive. That’s why people with means are willing to pay for it.
What people with means are buying at expensive schools is mostly connections and status. Which is fine. But excellent education can be had at public schools too. It's not that expensive to get good teachers, good coaches, decent equipment, nice books, etc. It's just more than we are paying now.
Sophie: And if you want public education to have the same standards that those schools invest in, what are you willing to give up? Your health benefits? Safety? Infrastructure? Retirement fund? Or are you willing to pay much higher taxes? Because the money will have to come up from somewhere else.
1. Spending money on the public is what the government is for. 2. It wouldn't take that much and it pays back in the long run.
"[A] 10 percent increase in spending, on average, leads children to complete 0.27 more years of school, to make wages that are 7.25 percent higher and to have a substantially reduced chance of falling into poverty," Bloomberg reports. "These are long-term, durable results. Conclusion: throwing money at the problem works."
How military and Education Spending Compare in America
How military and Education Spending Compare in America
Sophie: You seriously can’t compare what a private school can afford in terms of infrastructure, equipment and personnel when they’re earning money and spending it on a moderate amount of students, with what a public school can afford with government funds and a much higher student body to cater to.
Again, a "new Nissan Sentra" education would be good enough and is easily within reach. And it's the absolute smartest investment a country can make, in having most people be decently educated. It beats the alternative, letting money decide who deserves an education and letting TikTok take care of everyone else.
Thanks so much for speaking with me about this Sophie!
Thanks so much for speaking with me about this Sophie!
Sophie: Oh yeah, the good old leftist “let’s cut the military funding” argument… they are defending our country, our freedom! I say they deserve every penny.
The biggest threat to America is from within, and a poorly-educated populace is the reason why.
Sophie: Why are people that have been fortunate or clever enough to make more than decent livings be forced to contribute more?
Because this is not working. Most of what society produces is going to them.
cut to • BIG Big Chart •
Is it fair for 50 million children - most American kids - to be stuck with "used toyota" education so a hundred guys can have this?
What we are doing is hurting children. It's hurting the elderly, and the sick. It's devouring the middle class, making real education and healthcare out of reach for millions of people. We should care more about this vast suffering than about pushing a few clever and fortunate even higher.
cut to • BIG Big Chart •
Is it fair for 50 million children - most American kids - to be stuck with "used toyota" education so a hundred guys can have this?
What we are doing is hurting children. It's hurting the elderly, and the sick. It's devouring the middle class, making real education and healthcare out of reach for millions of people. We should care more about this vast suffering than about pushing a few clever and fortunate even higher.
D: This comes down to a belief system, not just tax dollars.
If you believe everything in this country is meant for us to share, your values make sense.
If you believe that people are only entitled to what they literally hold the title to, then the people you are arguing with’s values make sense.
Those are not the only choices. There is a workable midground between sharing everything and sharing nothing. But we are nowhere near it.
This is the wealth distribution that most Americans - 92% in 2012 - agreed would be fair:
This curve provides incentive and rewards success, allows for personal property and wealth accumulation. But instead of going to just a handful of guys, much of the value is retained by the people who created it with their hands - the workers. Even the very poorest still have enough to get by and give their kids a chance to do better.
This is a midground that almost everyone, nine out of ten people, can agree on. We should work together to make it happen.
This is the wealth distribution that most Americans - 92% in 2012 - agreed would be fair:
This curve provides incentive and rewards success, allows for personal property and wealth accumulation. But instead of going to just a handful of guys, much of the value is retained by the people who created it with their hands - the workers. Even the very poorest still have enough to get by and give their kids a chance to do better.
This is a midground that almost everyone, nine out of ten people, can agree on. We should work together to make it happen.
9-02-22 8:45 • Fair
Pep: I’m more irritated when grownups complain about things being unfair. Since when is ANYTHING fair?
Trying to be fair is a natural human behavior. People will not cooperate in small groups unless there is an adequate risk-to-reward ratio, so in-group fairness is selected for by tribal evolution.
We can see many mechanisms of fairness in our society. In law, we have the principle that similar crimes under similar circumstances should warrant similar punishments. There are judges and juries who try to find out what really happened before punishing. We have Judge Judy and the civil courts, trying to figure out fair resolutions to conflicts. We have a Declaration which states that all men are created equal (nice try). We also have refs and umps on the ball field to call the plays, proctors who supervise testing to prevent cheating, auditors, means testing...whole industries dedicated to making things as fair as we can.
We also have parents who teach children to share their toys, and who judge very harshly if parents buy a car for one kid but not the other, etc. Fairness is the principle behind meritocracy, where people earn reward in society based on the value of their contribution, because if that doesn't work fairly then why bother?
For all our failures, every great achievement of this country - establishing self-governance, ending slavery, enfranchising women, codifying civil rights - has been an effort to be more fair, because fairness works better.
We can see many mechanisms of fairness in our society. In law, we have the principle that similar crimes under similar circumstances should warrant similar punishments. There are judges and juries who try to find out what really happened before punishing. We have Judge Judy and the civil courts, trying to figure out fair resolutions to conflicts. We have a Declaration which states that all men are created equal (nice try). We also have refs and umps on the ball field to call the plays, proctors who supervise testing to prevent cheating, auditors, means testing...whole industries dedicated to making things as fair as we can.
We also have parents who teach children to share their toys, and who judge very harshly if parents buy a car for one kid but not the other, etc. Fairness is the principle behind meritocracy, where people earn reward in society based on the value of their contribution, because if that doesn't work fairly then why bother?
For all our failures, every great achievement of this country - establishing self-governance, ending slavery, enfranchising women, codifying civil rights - has been an effort to be more fair, because fairness works better.
9-09-22 8:45 • God Rest the Queen
Pep: The Queen died peacefully at Balmoral this afternoon.
*Many rounds of RIPs and good wishes ensue*
Pep: When will Charles become King?
He already did.
Sophie: Well then, long live the king!
BritishGal: I think the Monarch should ditch the role of being the titular head of the Church of England.
Maybe they should just retire the whole institution. We don't have time for these games anymore.
Pep: I don't think they will. The British love their symbolic monarchy.
We don't have time for these games?
Bingo. Symbolic monarchy is a very expensive game and Britain cannot even afford to keep pubs or old folk's homes open this winter.
British Pubs in Trouble
British Care Homes to Close
Enough with pretending that this family somehow deserves either the unimaginable luxury OR to be animatronics at Disney Britain.
British Pubs in Trouble
British Care Homes to Close
Enough with pretending that this family somehow deserves either the unimaginable luxury OR to be animatronics at Disney Britain.
Sophie: They contribute to the UK’s economy much more than what they cost.
No, only during years when there are royal births or weddings, and most British tourism is not related to the monarchy.
Your information is from before Brexit. Britain already ranks 10th in European tourism and that number will decline radically as their economy implodes.
Your information is from before Brexit. Britain already ranks 10th in European tourism and that number will decline radically as their economy implodes.
Meredith: I think we are seeing the end of the British monarchy. The royal family just needs to work out the exit details.
If King Charles III really wanted to be remembered for doing the right thing, that is what he should do. Blood monarchy is a capering farce which maintains castes and Charles is smart enough to know this.
Pep: So, what, their economy is imploding now?
Yes, it is.
Just a Year of Brexit Has Thumped U.K.’s Economy and Businesses
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... businesses
Brexit has been a disaster for Britain as collapsing European trade puts UK firms out of business
https://www.businessinsider.com/brexit- ... son-2021-3
Boris Johnson has left the UK economy in a parlous state
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... lous-state
Brexit: Six years of a crumbling British economy
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/opinion/artic ... 91_23.html
U.K. Water Firms Allowed to Dump Sewage Because of Chemical Shortage due to Brexit
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ify%20wall
Warning: England faces 'crippling shortage' of thousands of doctors in next decade
https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/he ... ce-warning
Britain’s Pubs Are Threatened by ‘Alarming’ Rise in Energy Bills
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/03/busi ... nergy.html
Energy crisis: Care homes ‘at risk of closure’ as bills rise
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/health/ ... 22562.html
Just a Year of Brexit Has Thumped U.K.’s Economy and Businesses
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... businesses
Brexit has been a disaster for Britain as collapsing European trade puts UK firms out of business
https://www.businessinsider.com/brexit- ... son-2021-3
Boris Johnson has left the UK economy in a parlous state
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... lous-state
Brexit: Six years of a crumbling British economy
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/opinion/artic ... 91_23.html
U.K. Water Firms Allowed to Dump Sewage Because of Chemical Shortage due to Brexit
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ify%20wall
Warning: England faces 'crippling shortage' of thousands of doctors in next decade
https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/he ... ce-warning
Britain’s Pubs Are Threatened by ‘Alarming’ Rise in Energy Bills
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/03/busi ... nergy.html
Energy crisis: Care homes ‘at risk of closure’ as bills rise
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/health/ ... 22562.html
Pep: Is ours?
Not yet.
Pep: Do you live in the UK? If not what makes you think you have a say?
You don't have to be British to say "Long live the King."
Sophie: Well maybe the problem was Brexit, not the monarchy.
Fact is, the majority of Brits support the monarchy and I’m sure they know better than you or me why they feel that way.
Fact is, because of Brexit they can no longer afford the "BMW or Tesla" of showy class pageantry and will have to get by on the "used Toyota" version. Perhaps they will come to feel that enough is enough.
Meredith: That whole family strikes me as a group with a lot of sadness. They need some happiness especially the children.
They seem like kind people, for the most part. It's no favor to them to keep them imprisoned in a gilded cage.
BritishGal: "Expensive game?" How much do you think the monarchy and associated events and locations affect Britain's tourism industry?
The cost is social, of maintaining a hereditary caste system. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all are created equal.
But if people really want to do it just for the money, they could still maintain all the associated events and locations as museums and theme parks. Open them up to the public, hire actors to wear hats and wave from the balcony. Stop holding this one poor sad family hostage. They don't deserve this.
But if people really want to do it just for the money, they could still maintain all the associated events and locations as museums and theme parks. Open them up to the public, hire actors to wear hats and wave from the balcony. Stop holding this one poor sad family hostage. They don't deserve this.
Pep: If all those articles mean Britain is imploding, then why wouldn't we view our economy as imploding too? You can find the same types of articles talking about how the US is spiraling into implosion.
The entire industrial world is in for a series of major shocks (Covid was just the first). Severe climate events are going to displace millions and, along with soil and water depletion, are drastically affecting crop yields. If we try to keep doing what we've been doing, collapse is inevitable.
Because of Brexit, Britain is just getting there first. But, they serve as a warning to us, of how quickly and thoroughly collapse can come if we:
1. Continue with Big Lie politics
2. Pursue nationalist policy
3. Choose scapegoating instead of tackling our issues head on.
The era of easy abundance over. There will not be enough to go around if we keep fighting over the pieces. There would be more than enough if we cooperate. It's the only choice.
Because of Brexit, Britain is just getting there first. But, they serve as a warning to us, of how quickly and thoroughly collapse can come if we:
1. Continue with Big Lie politics
2. Pursue nationalist policy
3. Choose scapegoating instead of tackling our issues head on.
The era of easy abundance over. There will not be enough to go around if we keep fighting over the pieces. There would be more than enough if we cooperate. It's the only choice.
Pep: So it isn’t just Britain whose economy is imploding, it’s the entire industrialized world…
I'm glad you understand the gravity of the situation, but as I said, not yet. However collapse is inevitable in our lifetimes if we do not make a major course correction.
"Environmental problems have contributed to numerous collapses of civilizations in the past. Now, for the first time, a global collapse appears likely. Overpopulation, overconsumption by the rich and poor choices of technologies are major drivers; dramatic cultural change provides the main hope of averting calamity."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3574335/
I hope people will understand that this why "the monarchy" and "tourism" are no longer sufficient justification for maintaining a hereditary caste system. We are going to have to change everything, and work past all the previous boundaries, to survive without terrible tragedy. The royal family is doing nothing but a pretty dance that actors could do better and it's perpetuating massive inequality.
We no longer have time for these games.
"Environmental problems have contributed to numerous collapses of civilizations in the past. Now, for the first time, a global collapse appears likely. Overpopulation, overconsumption by the rich and poor choices of technologies are major drivers; dramatic cultural change provides the main hope of averting calamity."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3574335/
I hope people will understand that this why "the monarchy" and "tourism" are no longer sufficient justification for maintaining a hereditary caste system. We are going to have to change everything, and work past all the previous boundaries, to survive without terrible tragedy. The royal family is doing nothing but a pretty dance that actors could do better and it's perpetuating massive inequality.
We no longer have time for these games.
9-02-22 8:45 • Conservative Kids Books
Pep: This news story says, a conservative publisher is putting out kid's books with conservative spin to counter liberal books like "Heather's Two Mommies." Is this a problem?
Conservative voices are using their free speech to create their content, and a reporter is using hers to critique the content, so the system seems to be working as intended. It's okay.
Pep: From the article:
“ the company published former Donald Trump defense aide Kash Patel’s The Plot Against the King, a storybook about the Steele dossier. “Let’s put this amazing book in every school in America,” Trump posted on Truth Social when it came out.”
SO, do you think they’ll be a problem if these books become mandatory reading in Southern and Midwest public schools?
When I picture the dystopian hellscape that would have to exist for this dreck to become mandatory, I imagine the books would be the least of it.
9-01-22 8:45 • Religious Employer Freedom
Teller: Some Texas lawmakers are suing, arguing that forcing them to provide coverage for HIV-prevention drugs with employee health insurance goes against their religious freedom. Should this be the employer's decision?
TD: Do I think employers should be able to choose what health care employees can have covered based on their religious views? Yes, I do. That is what religious freedom is all about.
I must disagree. Religious freedom means that you get to live by the dictates of your beliefs. It doesn't mean you can coerce other people to live by the dictates of your beliefs. What about their religious freedom?
TD: YOU have the option of working at a place that fits best with who YOU are and YOUR values. If you don't like what your employer is doing or not doing, why work there?
Why does anyone work anywhere, in the millions of lousy jobs in this country? Rent. Most people cannot afford to choose freedom over rent, so they are forced to choose oppression.
TD: Forcing someone to go against their belief (if they align with yours or not) is wrong. Period.
Exactly! It's particularly egregious when employers use their positions of high status and power to coerce subordinates to conform to their religious dictates.
TD: Stepping on one person for the benefit of another isn't how it works.
Unfortunately, stepping on the employee for the benefit of the employer is exactly how it works. This is just another sad example of it.
8-31-22 7:20 • Elliot Page
Vivian: He used to be Ellen, but now he is Elliot. It's that simple. Why don't people accept it?
The undeniable discovery that some people do not fit the traditional gender binary is still rather new. (To the mainstream. Obviously some people have always known.) It's a lot like discovering that species came to their present form by evolution. It's so different from the previous formulation - that things have always been the the way they are, because God - that it takes awhile for many people to accept. Especially people highly vested in the previous status quo.
Sharon: It’s been known for a while. And if you want to make G-d the big, bad wolf in why some people don’t just accept this as natural, then so be it.
Well it has been known for awhile - probably always - but mostly as a shameful secret. I should say, the open acknowledgement (we're not quite at acceptance) is very new, having come about within my lifetime. So people are getting used to it pretty quickly, especially compared to evolution.
Sharon: Look, there’s obviously no reason to mistreat a person with Down’s syndrome. But I’m sure all of us can understand that this isn’t the norm, it’s an anomaly. The same with genetic abnormalities linked to sexual chromosomes. They’re precisely that- abnormalities. They’re not examples of why transsexuality is normal, natural and good.
The fact still remains: acceptance doesn’t mean turning it into a norm.
Whatever the cause, deviations from the traditional gender binary happen to a lot of people. So, we have a lot to gain by turning it into a norm.
It would mean that more people could participate more fully in life in the ways that they would like to. It would mean that people would not be treated as abnormalities for behavior that seems as natural to them as our behavior seems to us. It opens up the door to familial and social and professional development more on par with the dominant population. It means less bullying, fewer suicides, and better mental health. And it means more diversity and more viewpoints and more unique voices in our communities, ultimately leading to more cooperation, and less scapegoating. The whole society benefits.
I really appreciate that you treat everyone with kindness no matter what and that's the most important thing. Thanks for speaking with me Sharon.
It would mean that more people could participate more fully in life in the ways that they would like to. It would mean that people would not be treated as abnormalities for behavior that seems as natural to them as our behavior seems to us. It opens up the door to familial and social and professional development more on par with the dominant population. It means less bullying, fewer suicides, and better mental health. And it means more diversity and more viewpoints and more unique voices in our communities, ultimately leading to more cooperation, and less scapegoating. The whole society benefits.
I really appreciate that you treat everyone with kindness no matter what and that's the most important thing. Thanks for speaking with me Sharon.
8-23-22 9:46 • The Big Loss (Liz Cheney I)
Quadra: Did you hear? Liz Cheney stood up against Trump, so she lost her House seat.
Harpy: Her husband's law firm represents Hunter Biden as well as Chinese interests. Swamp creature.
Do you seriously think Cheney would fall on her sword for Hunter Biden? That guy is nothing.
Trump and his movement are fascist. They do nothing but abuse power. Why do you want this?
Trump and his movement are fascist. They do nothing but abuse power. Why do you want this?
Harpy: Seriously!? This is a primary example of why I have given up on this country! I'm so glad I have more years behind me than ahead of me.
Sam: Yeah!
I care about this country too. Can you explain to me what this means?
Harpy: You wouldn't understand. Think about something besides Trump for once.
Yeah, this whole thing really revolves around Hunter Biden, lol.
Harpy: Thank you for proving my point.
The Republicans tried to steal the election with massive cheats, lies and abuses of power. This alone is the single most significant test of our system of governance since the Civil War, maybe ever. We have a system of law, of checks and balances. If there is no accountability for the lies, the abuses of power and the attack on the Capitol, it will happen again and if the liars gain power, that will be the end of self-governance. Liz Cheney was not representing "Chinese Interests" on the Jan 6 committee. She is trying to show the country the depths of depravity the "Stop the Stealers" sank to in order to overthrow the legitimately elected government. She lost her race because she stood up for rule of law.
That is what a point looks like - a cogent, principled explanation which anyone can understand. It's clear you do not have one.
That is what a point looks like - a cogent, principled explanation which anyone can understand. It's clear you do not have one.
Quadra: Well said!
------------------ Later ------------------------
Harpy: You've earned an eye roll.
Plexy: Yeah!
Sam: Agreed!
Sam: Agreed!
I just asked you a simple question. Why are you for this?
Plexy? Sam? You guys like this. Why?
Plexy? Sam? You guys like this. Why?
Sam: Because I happen to agree with her. And from personal experience and watching posting between you and others, some of them conservatives, it’s simply not worth the effort on some subjects.
That’s my opinion, not up for discussion.
Consider having positions you would be proud to explain.
Plexy: Because we can!
Yay! All I am asking is, why are you for this?
Zootie: Maybe you should consider respecting that others will have these different positions, are under NO obligation to explain anything to you or anyone else. You can be quite condescending when attempting to tell them how wrong you feel they are.
I am not the one rolling my eyes and claiming that "you just wouldn't understand". I am asking people to explain their positions. That is the utmost respect.
Literally no one will explain why they want this. That's not about me. And that is what should concern you.
Literally no one will explain why they want this. That's not about me. And that is what should concern you.
Sam: It's not up for discussion.
Quadra: But, well...isn't this a discussion group?
Sam: With some people it’s useless. They don’t, or won’t, accept your position and get nasty, condescending, disrespectful and rude if you don’t change your mind to agree with them.
None of that is me. I am as calm and respectful as you could ask for, and it's a very simple question. Please, take a moment and explain your political support. That's all I'm asking.
Zootie: People have to "agree to disagree".
A discussion can be great but when the tones change and the put downs begin, it's no longer about articulating. It becomes juvenile in and of itself.
Liz Cheney and the Jan 6 committee showed what happened. Republicans tried to steal the election. They are still trying. If they succeed in gaining illegitimate power, it will disrupt rule of law, perhaps permanently. Many support this.
Agreeing to disagree will not solve this. It's our country, all of ours. We need to be able to talk about it.
Agreeing to disagree will not solve this. It's our country, all of ours. We need to be able to talk about it.
Zootie: Are you trying to change some opinions others might have, or are you willing to accept they won't agree with you?
Of course I am trying to change people's opinions. That is what lawyers do in courtrooms, what senators do in congress, what Presidents do in speeches, what people do on street corners. It is the time-honored method of citizens in a democracy. I also try to have my opinion changed by others doing the same with better logic and evidence.
And of course I accept that people will not agree with me. I think we should discuss it anyway. Something is happening in our country that I feel puts us at risk. I would like to have an honest, straightforward conversation about why it is supported. We should be able to.
Thanks Zoot!
And of course I accept that people will not agree with me. I think we should discuss it anyway. Something is happening in our country that I feel puts us at risk. I would like to have an honest, straightforward conversation about why it is supported. We should be able to.
Thanks Zoot!
Zootie: No one, including you, should have to validate how or why they feel what they do to anyone else.
"How people feel" is very different from why they are supporting particular political candidates or social policies. The requirement of a democracy is that people do things for good reasons that can be explained.
Harpy: This is not a democracy!
The requirement of self-governance is that people do things for good reasons that can be explained. Better?
Sam: Based on what I have seen, it's no use explaining to you. Have a nice night.
I try my best to be unfailingly civil and rational in discussion. Furthermore, anyone can look back through this thread and see that the ONLY nasty, condescending, disrespectful and rude comments were made by Harpy, and liked by you. So please reconsider. I won't treat you like that.
I am having a very nice night, thank you Sam. I appreciate that you are part of it.
I am having a very nice night, thank you Sam. I appreciate that you are part of it.
Sam: A person can support any candidate of their choice for whatever reason they want. It’s not a requirement to explain or defend their reason, nor does the reason have to be good. They do not owe an explanation to anyone. A.N.Y.O.N.E.
Of course, no individual has to discuss their reasons. But how could we possibly be self-governing if N.O. O.N.E. is willing to discuss them? Self-governance exists and is managed through discussions among citizens, good faith efforts to settle differences and find plans that can work.
Do the reasons *have* to be good? Maybe not, but doesn't everything work out better when they are? People doing things for bad reasons is how we have gotten so much so terribly wrong. Reasons have to be good if we want the things we try to work.
Do the reasons *have* to be good? Maybe not, but doesn't everything work out better when they are? People doing things for bad reasons is how we have gotten so much so terribly wrong. Reasons have to be good if we want the things we try to work.
8-23-22 9:46 • The New Shibboleth (Liz Cheney II)