Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 14:32:40 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jonathan M. Bresler" <jmb> To: devnull@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Joel N. Weber II) Cc: jmb@FreeBSD.ORG, andrsn@andrsn.stanford.edu, hoek@hwcn.org, softweyr@xmission.com, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FTC regulating use of registrations Message-ID: <199708112132.OAA01265@hub.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <199708110858.EAA11563@ethanol.gnu.ai.mit.edu> from "Joel N. Weber II" at Aug 11, 97 04:58:09 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Joel N. Weber II wrote: > > I'm not sure that I agree with this. I lived for two and a half years > in an area of San Diego called Rancho Penasquitos. It's a relatively > affluent area; the house I lived in was four bedroom, three bathroom, > three car garage house. One reason many people choose to live there > is the good public school system. (Poway Unified School District > is percieved as the good area; for various hysterical raisins it > includes two communities that are a part of San Diego, as well as > a seprate town called Poway.) > > I think that the poorest people who atttend Iolani School (on scholarships) > are likely poorer than the poorest who attend Sunset Hills Elementary. > > (Most of my friends seem to be on scholarships, despite the fact that > supposedly most people in the school aren't.) > > So it seems to me that where we have a competitive education system, we do you say "competitive education system"?? were vouchers available there? could parents send their children to any school they choose? > different social classes will intermix more. Because with the current > system, affluent people can buy homes in the more expensive areas, > and thus get into the rich districts. > > for the ills that compulsory military service entails, > one benefit is to create a common experience shared by a > large number of the adult population. an experience that can > serve to unify the citizenry (provided its not abused, as it > was during the vietnam war) > > That is bullshit. My understanding is that if you went to college, > you could delay getting into the war. And if you didn't get in the > war in your first year of elibility for the draft, you likely wouldn't, > because IIRC they would take every 18 year old they could before they > strated looking at the 19 year olds. So if you got a deferment, > you'd likely be way down the list by the time you were in the pool > to be drafted again. you paragraph supports my comments regarding the vietnam war. world war 2 was different, i am less sure about korea, but i understand that college deferements were as vietnam war phemonomon(sp?). > > And in general, the affluent are more likely to go to college. > > > Anyway, I don't intend to go to college, but I am sure that I would > try to find some way to avoid going into the military if there is > a draft in the next few years (I'm 17 now). I think that > making a career of killing people is just plain wrong. yes it is. making a career out of defending yourself is not. if you dont, who do you expect will? if few enouhg people opt out, its not a severe problem, if too many people opt out, no one will be willing to defend the others. military service is a duty, not a "joy". its the cost of having a citizen army as opposed to a professional army. professional armies are dangerous, sometimes they believe that they know better than teh civilianb govt, sometimes they act upon that belief. jmb
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199708112132.OAA01265>