There are and have always been centrist and left of center individuals on wall street and in the financial world, a simple look at public campaign donation records will demonstrate that. According to you I'm guessing Warren Buffet is a "lefty" (does that make you a "righty"?). Not sure why you think someone who works on wall street would automatically be attracted to a right of center philosophy, especially the socially conservative part that makes up more and more of their identity and which is anathema to most on wall street.
Would Bernie Sanders Kill Trading As We Know It?
- Thread starter tommo
- Start date
High school is not free dumb ass. No wonder you say such stupid shit. Nothing is free.
Last edited:
Perhaps except for this one time my friend went to a restaurant and left without paying. That was free.
No nerve at all, just pointing out the real world doesn't match your echo chamber. Again, by your definition the SOCIALISTS have good company with Warren Buffet. But hey, he's just the world's most successful investor, so what does he know about what political orientation you think wall street should have.
The truth is that many on wall street have always matched your definition of a SOCIALIST, it just may not be something you realized until now. Obama has nothing to do with it. You may be surprised, just like a third of Louisiana Republicans were surprised that Obama wasn't responsible for the Hurricane Katrina response (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/21/obama-hurricane-katrina_n_3790612.html), that Obama in fact isn't the antichrist and is not responsible for all that is wrong in your world.
That was a brilliant comment and really helped us understand the logic underlying your point of view. Thank you.
sig
High costs are quite the opposite of free. I don't see how you can spin that by attacking a perfectly valid comment.
In our area a new high school was just built for $50 million and each tax payer (regardless of whether they have kids or not) pays between $3000 and $12000 directly attached to the public schools in the zip code.
It is quite naive to think that High School is free. This will be the case with state college soon as student loans will end up being bailed out by the tax payer and a division between private and public college will occur. Public State Landgrant Colleges will eventually not require a student loan for the "tuition" and private college will be payed out of pocket by the rich (just like high school today)
This is all called "socialism". As the state collectively taxes (highly) and then distributes the funds to provide services which were previously paid individually by people who work hard, are ambitious and strive to better themselves and their family
Last edited:
In most civil societies we don't expect children to "work hard" or "be ambitious and strive to better themselves and their family" in order to obtain a high school education. Most compassionate humans feel that a child shouldn't be punished for the sins or omissions of their parents, and even those who aren't compassionate realize that society works better when children's education is provided free of charge to those children with the cost paid for by society as opposed to leaving them no ability to contribute to society. If that's "socialism" to you and you think it's a bad thing, then it says a lot about you. Highly recommend you read a little Hobbes and understand the importance of the social contract to human civilization, without it life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short".
BTW, calling someone a "dumb ass" followed up by "No wonder you say such stupid shit." is absolutely not a "perfectly valid comment", it contains no content of value and significantly diminishes the level of the conversation, at least to those of us who have graduated from said "free" high schools. It was that comment I was referring to in my post quoting him, not yours, just so that's clear.
However it was WeToddDid2 who missed the entire point of the conversation, which was centered around if college should be free from the point of view of if the student pays tuition, and Frederick Foresight correctly pointed out that high school is currently free in that the student doesn't pay tuition. To be pedantic perhaps he should have spelled that out word by word, but again most people with a high school education would understand that this is what he meant. No one ever asserted that it is cost free to run a high school, that would be absurd. We all fully understand that teachers don't work for free and buildings don't build themselves and local property taxes pay for high schools, and there are no such thing as unicorns, the Easter Bunny, or Santa Clause. We just happen to think that's a good thing, and you apparently think it isn't. Could high schools be run much more efficiently and effectively? Absolutely. That isn't reason in most people's mind to get rid of them!
Sig
I can see that I have done more than strike a nerve with you. I think you are a bit emotionally unbalanced regarding the direction this topic is going. So I am going to back away slowly...I don't know if you are armed or what but I am not taking any chances...so I will not make any sudden moves and I will move along. Please seek the help that you need soon....