Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here

    Ronnocerman

    + friends - friends
    2,530 link karma
    14,293 comment karma
    send message redditor for

    [–] The Jehovah's Witnesses Owe $4,000 Every Day They Don't Turn Over Details Of Alleged Child Sex Abuse. It's Cost Them $2 Million So Far. Ronnocerman 2 points ago in news

    They literally can already do this. If they campaign, they lose their tax-exempt status, but it's an option. They already have that option. They choose not to because they want to keep the money instead.

    [–] Nothing to see here Ronnocerman 5 points ago in Mabinogi

    I'm confused... What am I missing here?

    [–] KFC comissioned this painting for the man who noticed that KFC only follows 11 herbs and spices on Twitter. Ronnocerman 14 points ago in pics

    But, as a devil's advocate here, it could have interested a social media engagement agent due to how clever it was, causing a selection bias of them being the kind of person to post about it.

    That said, I've got mixed emotions. On one hand, it's amazing that they just happened to post about it. On the other, if I were them, I wouldn't be dumb enough to attach it to my account where this kind of kerfluffle would come up. I'd do it anonymously so it couldn't be traced back to a PR firm.

    I'm undecided...

    [–] I'm a strong Libertarian in most respects, but when it comes to children, education, and the environment, I am strongly Statist. CMV. Ronnocerman 1 points ago in Libertarian

    you're a welfare state Democrat

    I'm against government retirement accounts, against universal healthcare, against federal subsidies, against selective taxation based on moral guides (tobacco, unhealthy foods, etc...).

    Honestly, I think it's only in /r/Lib that I would be viewed as a "Welfare State Democrat". Most of my friends are Democrats, and they view me as pretty solidly Libertarian, moreso than most of them are comfortable with.

    the tax burden would be far higher than even the most tax friendly libertarian would be comfortable with

    What in particular do you find to be expensive about this? Or are you speaking absolutely? My plan would result in approximately 10% of the current spending, if that.

    state intrusion on them just isn't a libertarian way of thinking

    Right, I get that these ideals aren't Libertarian. I suppose, what I'm mostly saying is "Libertarianism for the adults; welfare and education for the kids.". I just don't see anything close to the ideal Libertarian state coming about or surviving without measures like these.

    [–] I'm a strong Libertarian in most respects, but when it comes to children, education, and the environment, I am strongly Statist. CMV. Ronnocerman 1 points ago in Libertarian

    then wouldn't it make sense to only have children if you can financially provide for them and if you can't then find another who can?

    Yes, but dumb people who are shitty parents do exist and will continue to exist.

    [–] I'm a strong Libertarian in most respects, but when it comes to children, education, and the environment, I am strongly Statist. CMV. Ronnocerman 2 points ago in Libertarian

    And what happens when you run into parents who really don't care about their children enough to spend any significant sum of money on their education?

    Assuming school isn't compulsory, these parents wouldn't send their kids. Assuming it is, they'd pay for the bare minimum. If the "bare minimum" was high, the cost would be prohibitive.

    You end up with rich parents having well-educated kids and poor parents having terribly educated ones, yet again.

    [–] I'm a strong Libertarian in most respects, but when it comes to children, education, and the environment, I am strongly Statist. CMV. Ronnocerman 1 points ago in Libertarian

    My issue is that the existence of private schools motivates the rich to cut education options for those who can't afford it. That is, no matter how much you obligate parents to provide an education, if the public option isn't funded and the parents don't have time, the children end up with a terrible education.

    Having an "opt out" ability makes it so that those who can afford to opt out do so and then attempt to refuse to fund the public option, thus making it so that children of those who can't afford to "opt out" receive a very sub-par education, if any.

    [–] I'm a strong Libertarian in most respects, but when it comes to children, education, and the environment, I am strongly Statist. CMV. Ronnocerman 2 points ago in Libertarian

    Unless you're an anarchist, stop giving this guy shit about schools and medical services.

    Thanks for saying this. TBH, this is what I was wondering. Libertarian implies not Anarchist which implies some government which implies some form of funding, which is almost certainly through tax. It feels so weird to me that any mention of any government funding is viewed as Statist, and yet the same people don't describe themselves as Anarchist?

    Would you support a gradual phasing out of publicly funded schools?

    See, I like your idea, I just believe that there are many children whose parents either can't afford it or "can't afford it". That is, parents who legitimately don't have the money or parents who don't view their child's education as important. Parents who, if schools were private and non-compulsory, would not send their kids to school, and if schools were private and compulsory, would pick the bare minimum cheapest school. I believe that a lot of these parents exist, and they tend to have the most children as well.

    My issue with public education is that government is just as capable of spreading false information as private schools.

    Yeah, I admitted this in a delta in another comment. I'm not sure what the best solution is here. I think the harm of the chance of spreading false information in some schools that probably already exist in areas where the kids would believe the lies anyway is worth it to make sure that all kids have an education and that all parents who want to increase the quality of their kid's education will have to help all kids too.

    That's the extent to where I'm a Statist via a socialist view despite me being mostly Libertarian. I'm okay with compelling parents to help educate all children better if they want their own children educated better.

    [–] I'm a strong Libertarian in most respects, but when it comes to children, education, and the environment, I am strongly Statist. CMV. Ronnocerman 2 points ago in Libertarian

    the whole goal of capitalism is to make a better life for your child than yourself.

    That might be your goal, but there are many who don't have this goal. There are many who would, were public schools not mandated, have their kids sit at home all day doing nothing.

    Shitty parents exist (and are actually quite common), and public school does a decent job of making sure that their children can still make something of themselves. Making education non-compulsory makes it so that their children have nearly no chance at life.

    You might as well ban all the luxuries of successful people because they give an advantage to their children.

    My very point is that the best area ends up being in the grey, not at one end or the other. Education creates the largest disparity.

    when in fact I used to live in a rough neighborhood with a group of parents who worked overtime to pay for their children to attend a private school than the shithole public school I went to

    And the kids whose parents couldn't afford private school or didn't bother to try to afford it? Do they just go nowhere?

    [–] I'm a strong Libertarian in most respects, but when it comes to children, education, and the environment, I am strongly Statist. CMV. Ronnocerman 2 points ago in Libertarian

    This isn't a reason for the argument I wasn't making, correct.

    Private education will almost always beat out public education. The issue is that access to private education is limited severely based on parental income, which is the problem I'm describing.

    [–] I'm a strong Libertarian in most respects, but when it comes to children, education, and the environment, I am strongly Statist. CMV. Ronnocerman 1 points ago in Libertarian

    Schooling and education are services that can be provided by the market.

    For a cost that a large percentage of people would not be able to afford.

    The point is that the rich would not donate enough money to offset the fact that their children are groomed to stay rich and the poor's children are groomed to stay poor. This creates a huge disparity in wealth, with the large percentage of people, due to circumstances of their birth, being unable to achieve any form of prosperity.

    [–] I'm a strong Libertarian in most respects, but when it comes to children, education, and the environment, I am strongly Statist. CMV. Ronnocerman 2 points ago in Libertarian

    If someone has the ability to achieve a better education then they should fully be able to achieve that.

    This leads to a situation where the rich children become far better educated and the poor children are forced to receive education at a school whose funding the rich parents are constantly trying to gut.

    [–] I'm a strong Libertarian in most respects, but when it comes to children, education, and the environment, I am strongly Statist. CMV. Ronnocerman 3 points ago in Libertarian

    The free market and free association both have areas of immense weakness and both become self-defeating if realized to their most ideal forms. This is my attempt at a pragmatic system of government that maintains the two to the best that I believe is possible.

    More specifically, the free market harms the environment and "free association" harms children.

    [–] I'm a strong Libertarian in most respects, but when it comes to children, education, and the environment, I am strongly Statist. CMV. Ronnocerman 1 points ago in Libertarian

    I assume you meant private schools.

    I believe in (to a large extent) free association for adults, but the only way that I believe that is achievable is if the adults have proper access to information and education, otherwise it turns into the informed taking advantage of those who both aren't informed and never had the opportunity to become informed.

    [–] I'm a strong Libertarian in most respects, but when it comes to children, education, and the environment, I am strongly Statist. CMV. Ronnocerman -1 points ago in Libertarian

    You don't trust people to raise their children.

    I don't trust people to have the means to provide an education for their children and the continued existence of private schools serves as the biggest gap in opportunity between children born rich and children born poor.

    [–] I'm a strong Libertarian in most respects, but when it comes to children, education, and the environment, I am strongly Statist. CMV. Ronnocerman 2 points ago in Libertarian

    Does the post modern gender/race stuff seem pretty effective on Millienials to you?

    None of that was in the curriculum when they were in school.

    The state school system doesn't have to be used like that, but the nature of the nation-state is to use it nefariously. DARE ringing any bells for you?

    Δ

    Had really only been considering effectiveness and not content as much. Though I disagree with the DARE example because it was ineffective, but it does show intent.

    Yea well I don't see you stopping the US from dropping bombs daily, war is the worst thing for the environment.

    That'd be in one of my Libertarian views, where I'd advocate isolationism, but this is a CMV. I would also argue for reduction of foreign intervention.

    I know you want it to be cheap, but that's not what statist would do with it, they would use it as a foot in the door to get rid of individual gun ownership.

    Hold up, I never said it was required.