DEAR EDITOR:
”
Not to sound too peacenik, but could someone explain why bombs
are a noble expenditure and education is socialist?
”
– Dispatch Columnist Dennis Taylor, 9 April 2003
DEAR EDITOR:
“Not to sound too peacenik, but could someone explain why bombs are a noble expenditure and education is socialist?” – Dispatch Columnist Dennis Taylor, 9 April 2003
“Powers granted to Congress …To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years.” – United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 8
“Socialism, … ownership and operation of the means of production and distribution by society or the community rather than by private individuals.” – Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary
Any time you feel the need to lighten the burden of your ignorance, Mr. Taylor, please feel free to ask. I am always delighted to be of any assistance within my means. I am glad that you were able to overcome the embarrassment of asking so basic a question. Really now, Mr. Taylor, “bombs bad, education good” is the level of reasoning expected of a child. A small child.
Nations were born in war and exist in a permanent state of covert and/or overt conflict. They exist for one reason and one reason only, and that is to train and support armies in the field. Nations do other things, but the core of their existence, their raison d’etre, the one task against which all other national endeavors are measured, is to persevere in battle. The reason is simple; if they fail they die. A nation can fail at law, it can fail at commerce, it can fail at morality and religion and still continue. If it fails in battle, it ceases to exist.
Buying bombs is the fundamental reason for taxation. All other uses of public money are, by and large, superfluous and unnecessary.
An exceptionally superfluous and unnecessary public expenditure is education financed, operated, and controlled by the government. Which, by the way is what makes Gavilan College, GUSD, and every other public school socialist institutions. “Socialist” is not an insult, it is a term describing a type of economic organization that applies 100 percent to public schools.
Socialism is a lousy type of economic organization; socialist institutions typically have high costs, poor quality, and are rife with corruption. Our public schools are no exception. Compared to local private schools, the public schools have much higher operating costs and much lower objective performance. The corruption is obvious upon inspection.
Why are we against education bonds? For an institution like Gavilan or GUSD that has stable, predictable financial resources and requirements, the need for bond financing is a symptom of very bad financial management. Bond interest payments decrease the long term financial capability of the organization and should be used only as a last resort in a desperate situation. Neither Gavilan nor GUSD would have gotten into their current financial dilemmas without bad management and neither will correct the situation without a change in management. Wheeling in another few barrow loads of money isn’t going to fix anything.
Stuart Allen, Gilroy
Submitted Thursday, April 10 to ed****@****ic.com
