PolicyMic

Jacinda Chan It could be done either way. In one case, the Levy Rosenbaum case I cited, everything was done in the US. However, most exchanges are performed outside the US. It's not difficult to go overseas to have transplants done. But it often ends in disa...

• 0
• 0
• 2 weeks ago

Jacinda Chan I'm pretty sure google can give you leads on which hospitals already perform illegal transplants. Plus people make tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars on these transactions.

• 0
• 0
• 2 weeks ago

Jacinda Chan Actually, this stuff that you listed is easy to circumvent. I wrote an entire report on organ trafficking if you would like to share ideas?

• 1
• 1
• 2 weeks ago

Jacinda Chan It is not just providing information. It is providing means. It is providing a list of donors. In hospitals, accessing that information without a warrant is illegal.

• 1
• 0
• 2 weeks ago

Jacinda Chan I agree, but there needs to be laws to protect poor people from being exploited.

• 1
• 0
• 2 weeks ago

Jacinda Chan The problem is that most people who sell organs do so out of financial necessity and become exploited. Otherwise, why not just donate for altruistic reasons?

• 0
• 0
• 2 weeks ago

Jacinda Chan I agree. It does make organ donation seem cool. But it's just very flood of everyone declaring that they are organ donors that could cause people to have transplants under the table. You don't need to tell everyone you're an organ dono...

• 0
• 0
• 2 weeks ago

Jacinda Chan LOL She's right. That was a great laugh!

• 1
• 0
• 2 weeks ago

Jacinda Chan Can you please explain how the Sunni Shia conflict is related to the Armenian Genocide?

• 0
• 1
• 4 weeks ago

Jacinda Chan No, President Obama side stepped genocide yesterday. Google his speech.

• 0
• 0
• 4 weeks ago

Jacinda Chan You're right about the EU: The only thing the US can do is tell the EU what the US wants. Hence the word encourage. What were the other qualifiers you were referring to in the second paragraph? I don't understand your point in the f...

• 1
• 1
• 4 weeks ago

Jacinda Chan In some way, education conveys the message that radical Islam is bad.

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan I think we'll have to agree to disagree about the interpretation of this program violates the law, but this discussion was productive.

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan How do you know this?

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan Correct. And just as they teach terrorism is bad, so too could they teach intolerance is bad.

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan The second link is current. The first link explains what education is designed to do in the US. My program would be based on the same concept.

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan Sorry one more explanation on the laws: "TEACHING—Schools may teach about religion, including the Bible or other scripture, the history of religion, the Bible-as-literature, and the role of religion in the United States and other countries. Sc...

• 1
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan My program would be designed along these lines: "[Education] was to provide a common culture and a means of inculcating new Americans with democratic values. Public schools, in other words, were to be a high-pressure “melting pot” to help Am...

• 1
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan It would just argue that tolerance is love. Hopefully, this would resonate with Christian teaching. I mean we already teach the evils of socialism and tobacco.

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan I know what you're talking about, but the program part on love/tolerance would be under the SECULAR part. It would, therefore, not violate the Constitution.

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan Ok, I phrased it wrong. They all preach the Gospel because that's the definition of Christianity, not mine.

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan Dear Professor Muir, Thank you for taking the time to reply to my article! I appreciate your insightful comment and recommended reading. Sincerely, Jacinda Chan

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan They all believe in the same basic teachings: 1) love God and 2) love people. If love is taught to be tolerance under a secular guise, then it wouldn't violate laws. Plus the curriculum could include various teachings, but would the teachings of...

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan No, Christianity has denominations. It's not like Islam. Most denominations all practice the same basic principles.

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan I understand what you are saying, but there aren't any sects in Christianity. The religion as a whole is supposed to be about tolerance, but humans often twist the religion to justify their actions as do most religions of the world.

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan All the government would be teaching is that tolerance lies within Christianity. How do you know what the norm is?

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan Because these classes would not be taught through a Christian lens, it would not violate the separation between church and state. The government would not endorse a religion or discriminate against other religions, which is the only practice the Cons...

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan Not so much through a Christian lens, but more like teaching about religion. It would be like a class to show that there is nothing wrong with tolerance. In fact, tolerance is good and taught by the Christian church.

• 0
• 1
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan Yeah, I understand now.When people tell me how conservative some states are, I think it is hard for me to imagine because I was born and raised in California. I've only left the state to go Las Vegas.

• 1
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan Agreed!

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan Exactly.

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan I don't understand.

• 0
• 1
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan More like the Tobacco Free program in California. The important part to emphasize is that one is not sinning by being tolerant. In fact, tolerance is obedience to God.

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan What is the context of the Constitution?

• 0
• 3
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan I'm advocating for programs like the "Tobacco Free" program in CA. When I was young, the schools had these program once a semester showing how bad smoking is because the problem was growing like homophobic bullying. In the same sense, ...

• 1
• 1
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan Not so much through a Christian lens, but more like teaching about religion. It would be like a class to show that there is nothing wrong with tolerance. In fact, tolerance is good.

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan Thank you for the alternative cause. I think it is a smart suggestion. I went to a Protestant church too, and it taught the evils of homosexuality. Why do you think that is? Would you say the pastor is just irrationally afraid? Both churches probably...

• 1
• 1
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan I realize that every single religion has some degree of homophobia. But I thought that focusing on Christianity would be the most beneficial because according this website, http://scholarscorner.com/didache/AndrogynnPOPC, America's homophobic cu...

• 0
• 0
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan I realize that every single religion has some degree of homophobia. But I thought that focusing on Christianity would be the most beneficial because according this website, http://scholarscorner.com/didache/AndrogynnPOPC, America's homophobic cu...

• 0
• 2
• 1 month ago

Jacinda Chan Where are you referring to?

• 0
• 1
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan How do you protect without police?

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan How could anyone overcome the US though?

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan That is exactly the problem. Humans have been so ingrained with the idea of the nation-state that it has gotten so much power that no institution exists to counter it. Hence, human rights will always be sidelined until people are valued over state so...

• 0
• 1
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan I don't think the UN will ever change because the UNSC superpowers will not allow it. That's why the situation is so devastating.

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan I never said that either. I said that the problem is that the UN values state sovereignty and national interests too much.

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan Thanks, Selma! I thought I said that. Did it not come out correctly?

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan But not enforced.

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan How well are these chapters observed? Can they be observed if national interest are valued over them?

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan O, sorry, world I meant General Assembly. The P5 aren't elected.

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan How do humans police other humans?

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan I agree, but I think that's the problem with the UN. Valuing state sovereignty allows states to avoid upholding human rights.

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan My argument was exactly that -- that the UN can only act if everyone wants change, which allows human rights abuses. Otherwise, the UN cannot do anything. How did you think that I thought that the UN could do what it wanted?

• 0
• 1
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan Michael, You're forgetting that peaceful protesters were attacked in Syria.

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan I never specified what the UN should do. I only said it should be reformed.

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan The difference would be that the judicial review would be elected by the world. The point is to keep sovereign states because no one is ready to give that up.

• 1
• 1
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan If the international community should protect human rights, then who should?

• 0
• 1
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan I agree, and I think it's sad that human rights are not more important in the world.

• 1
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan Shouldn't all countries be held accountable for human rights abuses?

• 0
• 1
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan I left it open to what the UN should do with Syria. I merely suggested the UN should limit the reasons for a veto.

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan Lev, I think you have good intentions, but if the UN doesn't have to make human rights protection a priority, who will protect people from inhumane governments? It was, as you said, Russia and China's very fear that prevented anyone from ...

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan I agree. That's why I argue that the UN was never about humanitarian efforts.

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan I didn't have enough space to include the US Israeli vetoes. Acting under unilateral military action like if the West bombed Syria by itself would only cause more casualties. A military would be nice except I thought it would be too big ...

• 1
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan You're right. I failed to think of an incentive why the UNSC P5 would agree to such a measure. I assumed they would do so simply because not all their power would be taken from them.

• 1
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan What about Article 2.4? I'm unsure what Articles 9, 10, and 14 have to do with social justice. Can you please explain?

• 0
• 1
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan Do you think someone should help broker negotiations to stop the abuses? If so, who?

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan Where is your proof about the EU?

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan Do you think the country's prosperity is more important than genocide recognition for a powerful diaspora? If so, why are genocide bills so crucial?

• 0
• 0
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan I actually said that the bottom like is that the EU doesn't want to admit Turkey because it's a large Muslim country. Turkey hasn't complied with many human rights criteria, you're right, but the EU is creating obstacles, and the ...

• 0
• 2
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan No problem. I cut out the sentence explaining this in detail. The Armenian genocide issue is not a requirement for accession. The only reason it becomes an issue is because of the large French Armenian diaspora that often lobbies against Turkish acce...

• 1
• 1
• 3 months ago

Jacinda Chan Just because the international community regards Taiwan as part of China does not mean you can disregard China's feelings that they still feel they don't have Taiwan, which they have reiterated multiple times. China also still tries multipl...

• 0
• 0
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan China is not as powerful or rich as you think. That is why so many people live in poverty there. They just don't broadcast it to the world.

• 0
• 0
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan They would get money too.

• 0
• 0
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan Human rights are not something the Chinese government wants or ever did. It's more something the US and the West has wanted from it. If the US gives China something it wants -- closer ties with Taiwan -- China would have to give the US something...

• 0
• 0
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan It would benefit. It would be ever closer to its dream of reunification with Taiwan.

• 0
• 0
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan Retaining stability by having Taiwan as a modern "vassal state", which does not accept the PRC as the legitimate government of China could prove that China's stability is not threatened if they grant rights and allow disagreements.

• 0
• 0
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan According to "Orville Schell, a longtime observer of China, says that even today this perception is held by most Chinese. 'I don't think there's any more sensitive issue,' he says, with the possible exception of Taiwan, becau...

• 0
• 0
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan I know, but what is your evidence?

• 0
• 0
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan How do you know Hu Jintao's motives if his words and say otherwise?

• 0
• 0
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan The reponse to your first statement is up above. As to your second statement: Why is Hu Jintao still calling for reunification?

• 0
• 0
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan Taiwan would still keep its sovereignty, but it could not advocate for another's territory. I don't even think that would be fair. Besides did Sun Yat-Sen ever completely rule mainland China? Actually the US would have legitimate reason ...

• 0
• 0
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan Those actions never addressed the sovereignty issue. One of the main reasons China doesn't want to change is because they see human rights as Western ideas threatening their sovereignty. http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/01/pdf/china_h...

• 0
• 1
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan Are you saying China is unlikely to agree because they already think they have Taiwan?

• 0
• 1
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan Technically it would be one China because as a modern "vassal state" China would have the name of being sovereign over Taiwan even though they wouldn't have any authority over them. It's a little more than the recognition the UN g...

• 0
• 1
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan When Tibet was a traditional vassal state, it retained its sovereignty. So why couldn't Taiwan keep its sovereignty like Gary Sanford said? Yes, the US would broker this deal if it wanted to improve China's human rights -- a big IF. The US ...

• 0
• 0
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan We could gain a position of strength if we actually cared about the country. For example, instead of trying to impose policies that contradict Russia's culture, the US could encourage the government to enforce human rights. That way the US could...

• 0
• 0
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan I actually disagree. If the US didn't get offended by every little disagreement that they had with Russia, but instead helped them improve their country, it would have two effects. 1) Russia wouldn't think that these threats helped t...

• 0
• 1
• 5 months ago

Jacinda Chan I agree. It hurts the Cubans too.

• 1
• 0
• 6 months ago

Jacinda Chan My argument was that Venezuela has influence in Cuba, but will not likely use it because it doesn't agree with American economic policy.

• 0
• 0
• 6 months ago

Jacinda Chan But it is not helping so far. The international community needs to do be more involved in Cuba, or actually in all human rights problem areas. If the international community put as much effort into solving human rights abuses as they do in economic p...

• 0
• 0
• 6 months ago

Jacinda Chan I agree. Sanctions are ineffectual and harm civilians. I disagree though the having middle class is the only necessary factor for democracy. I believe it is one factor, but it is useless if the government will continue to oppress people.

• 0
• 0
• 6 months ago

Jacinda Chan Venezuela. Cuba relies on Venezuela for money to sustain social programs. The problem is Venezuela would not agree to help because they don't want to help the US.

• 0
• 0
• 6 months ago

Jacinda Chan Agreed: The direct relationship between capitalism and democracy or human rights is spurious. Therefore, increasing social welfare does not necessarily decrease democracy or freedom.

• 3
• 0
• 6 months ago

Jacinda Chan That's what's wrong with the current international system. All they do is shun states. In order to create real change, the international system must be completely overhauled to allow international policing to be enforced.

• 2
• 0
• 6 months ago

Jacinda Chan Yes, I am wondering what caused the different reactions between the police in NYC and California's East Bay. Also, you don't need to use violence to make people move so you can tear down tents.

• 0
• 0
• 6 months ago

Jacinda Chan I don't have enough information to give an accurate answer. In order to answer your question, I would need to look at the history of both police forces. I am wondering though why the NYPD hasn't enforced its zero tolerance policing yet?

• 1
• 0
• 6 months ago

Jacinda Chan I'm not actually there. My friend sent me the video.

• 3
• 0
• 6 months ago

Jacinda Chan I was just arguing the movement was large enough to eventually in a couple decades change politics.

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan I think the people want more than accountability and regulations on banking. I think the people want justice for the 99%. They're angry about the conditions they've had to put up with for so long. Their demands are about more than just bank...

• 3
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Hmmm.I thought there was a ruling. O, wait I meant the Appeals Court ruling.

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan I don't understand what you're trying to get at with your information.

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan I have yet to see the government's support genuinely reflected in the lives of Americans. I still see plenty of poor people and others struggling to get by especially before the financial meltdown. It's hard to believe the US is a culture o...

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan So you would just say these problems are new, but before the government already helped?

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Thanks, George! I appreciate your input! I admit I couldn't find the right words to express it clearly because I'm not even sure they exist yet.

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Thanks, Susan! To me, the "equal opportunity" we proclaim in the US always meant you were equal to do what you wanted, but the government didn't necessarily have to help you get there. I didn't actually know what to call it, but t...

• 2
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Actually I thought I wrote that the shift occurred in that Americans now hold the government responsible for failing to create equal opportunity, not the individual for lacking in ability. Or can you please elaborate on what you mean?

• 2
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Maybe Americans are becoming radical? Maybe the communist are just in NY? In Sacramento, the Occupy protests are pretty tamed.

• 0
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan I really have nothing to say to Leif or anyone else who wants to debate the merits of socialism v. capitalism because that is not the goal of my article. I will defend my facts though. Thanks for the support though!

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Too many of us posting at once.I'll leave the rest for you two to debate.

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Tom, who are you replying to?

• 0
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan I just googled them. It says there's only about 12-15 actual Anonymous at OWS, and people just like dressing like their leader. I was under the impression that most demands were the ones I listed. Plus the article I just read said Adbusters star...

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Maybe tell them instead? My argument is who is right or wrong. It was simply to show a changing culture.

• 2
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Who are you talking to?

• 0
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Many Americans are disenchanted by the government not doing anything after 8 years of right-winged policies under Bush that left citizens with high unemployment and little accountability. I think a lot of Americans want change and to see somebody ie ...

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan I mean they're arguing for this: Say person A comes from a lower middle-class background where its parents have an AA degree and teach it to be quiet and never question authority. Person B comes from a rich family whose parents hold PHDs and...

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan But that's not what the policies reflect. That US is a democracy, which means they get implemented only when a majority elects to do so. Therefore, a lot of capitalists must think that individual success is the individual's responsibility n...

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan How do you know that will hinder their reelection?

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Obama and Pelosi already backed OWS.

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Yes, I agree. I would like proof of your argument, Phil. And then answer this: If capitalism provides social service, why do they not give me caregivers so I can go to school?

• 2
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan I did not define it anyway I want. I sent you links and definitions to backup my argument. BTW, socialism is not capitalism.

• 2
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan I never said that. I said OWS wants basic guarantees so the majority of Americans can access the same goods as the top 1% without needing to worry about basic necessities.

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Tom explains it well. And also, you just said capitalists want the private sector to handle social services first. How many capitalists do you know will make policies that provide social services?

• 2
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Gary, the information was to prove OWS has single cause, not to prove whether OWS' idea is actually going to help the nation. Whether it is helpful or hurtful to the nation doesn't imply that it will fail. Honestly, I cannot tell you the ne...

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan OWS doesn't want equal results, but equal opportunity to gain access to the same goods as the wealthiest 1%. This means they want guarantees like healthcare for all, better education, more jobs, which could include jobs in the infrastructure ind...

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan I never said they have a single demand. I said they a single cause, which is different. OWS wants the government to be accountable to the 99% and provide services that help them have an equal chance getting the same goods as the wealthiest 1% of Amer...

• 2
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Yes, because you said capitalism is based on private ownership. So I was arguing that the idea of private ownership is what causes the government to place social services in the private sector. You were arguing that capitalism doesn't place soci...

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan To my "It is exactly", why is it a no? What social organizations are you referring to?

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan LOL No, I'm neutral.

• 2
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan I'm sorry. What?

• 0
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Thank you, Jon, but I'm Switzerland on most OWS' issues.

• 2
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Then, who do you believe should provide social services?

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan It is exactly that private ownership that puts social services in the hands of the private sector.

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan LOL Tell that to the genius who invented it. That was the reporter in me quoting since I was never allowed to be biased before.

• 2
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Yeah, but nobody wants to admit the negatives of their ideas. Even I have trouble with that one lol!

• 2
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Gary, you're one person. C'mon, we both studied for the same LSAT. You know "most" only qualifies for 50% or more of the sample size. You're right: I don't believe OWS' demands will meet their goal. I just think the...

• 1
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Thank you, Tom!

• 2
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan First, according to a WALL STREET JOURNAL article, "Personal responsibility, in a capitalist system, means individuals freely control their own money, and personally enjoy or suffer the consequences of their own choices." That is what I mea...

• 2
• 0
• 7 months ago

Jacinda Chan Thanks Susan! That is a good question, which no one has a real answer to. A lot of people think the US is influencing the UN's decision because the US doesn't want Haiti to become socialist. Personally I think it's because the UNSC...

• 1
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Yes, that is correct, and the case of Haiti is particularly bad because the dictator, who took over during the coup in 2004 when the UN came, signed the agreement to intentionally leave out any accontability mechanisms. This was done to oppress Aris...

• 1
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan I wasn't offended. I should've clarified my second comment referred to your question.

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Ok. Assistive technology is adaptive technology for disabled people, who cannot operate a computer using traditional devices. I'm using my eyes to operate my computer, which has a very low-demand in the world because most who need such a sophist...

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Agreed and thank you for your suggestion.

• 1
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan 1) You asked me why I had not replied. 2) I explained why I am so slow to respond. 3) I'm not answering your questions because a) they are irrelevant to the discussion and b) I don't answer personal questions on here.

• 2
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Thanks! I think if everyone knew more about Chile, they'd understand my argument because that is the foundation.

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Those are the things we need equal access to. They're not what need equal price.

• 2
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan It proves our cultural was not intended for rugged individualism. So we can embrace socialism to achieve basic rights.

• 2
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan No, I just have an old slow computer because the government won't pay for one for work purposes. Assistive technology costs $9000. I'm unemployed and can't get the education I need because our healthcare system doesn't pay for car...

• 3
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan My comment to Gary got misplaced. That was supposed to be where he asked where I found the Founding Fathers wanted social policies. Equal opportunity to quality education. http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/edumat/hreduseries/tb1b/Section1/tb1-3.ht...

• 2
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2009/07/the_calvin_quincentenary_and_american_liberty.html

• 1
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan The federal government should provide for the poor in all basic rights, but we need the policies to implement these ideas.

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Why wouldn't it help? At least, poor students wouldn't be stuck in such poverty.

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Not if you make public education just as good as private school. Did you even read what is happening in Chile? The same thing is happening in the US. If nationalization could solve Chile's problems, why can't it solve America's inequal...

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan What do you suggest, Gary? How do we guarantee an equal right to education for all?

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan I cited it above.

• 2
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Equal opportunity, Gary. You can have that for disadvantaged students unless the government helps them.

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan But that's the problem: Education should not be competed for because it is a RIGHT NOT COMMODITY.

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Equal education for all is in the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, which the US is a signatory to. As such, it is the federal government's responsibility to guarantee this right. Not doing so, therefore, violates ...

• 2
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan What?

• 1
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Why do you ask me questions but never answer mine?

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan If education is as good as you claim, then why do rich people need to spend extra money on private education? Different qualities of education don't need to exist. I'm not advocating on infringing on anyone's rights. I'm advocatin...

• 1
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Decentralization's goal is nonintervention. Nonintervention is not supposed to provide for its people. People must fend for themselves. This produces more inequality especially in local governments because they have an uneven distribution of wea...

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan This article argues that the Founding Fathers intended to have social policies and how they create freedoms. http://www.socialdems.com/page.asp?pid=1513

• 1
• 4
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Yeah, they would role over in their graves if they knew we didn't want to provide social welfare.

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Do you plan on providing a better education? Who would you like to provide education?

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan That's my exact point -- support people so they can obtain an equal education, which the government is providing. Even Milton Friedman knew the government needs to provide basic services to achieve freedom. http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/ro...

• 1
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan That's exactly what violates the right to education.

• 2
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Why is it a human right then?

• 1
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan I'm not sure what socialism in the family is. You're right. Capitalism created itself because Puritans, who are Americans, didn't want a centralized government because Britain used it to oppress Americans, but what wrong with helping p...

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan I didn't cite mercantilism. Jon did. Why can't it be both? Also, who says Scott Bidstrup's information is wrong? The first fallacy of logic is too believe someone because of authority.

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Not for each student, but groups or genres. Tests, but not standardized.

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Is there any evidence that the Dept. of Education (which ostensibly has nationalized education priorities) has improved education in the US? Where are the results? I don't know, but system is a lot like Chile. Can you say Chile is does not need ...

• 1
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Yeah, but the US adopted the ideas of rugged individualism, which uses capitalism as support, because of the Puritans. The US adopted capitalism because it reflected Calvin's ideas, which the Founding Fathers agreed with.

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan How would a nationalized education system correct this? It would insure students in poor neighborhoods received the same quality of education as students in middle- and upper-class neighborhoods. Education is the responsibility of the individual?...

• 1
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan LOL You crack me up! This article explains what the Founding Fathers intended: http://www.bidstrup.com/economics.htm. You know decentralization and competition was founded by the Puritans. Their leader John Calvin advocated no social services beca...

• 1
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Human rights are different from commodities. They are not driven by competition. They're supposed to be universal, which means government is supposed to provide it equally for all. Education is one of these rights. Rights can be improved, but no...

• 2
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan It's not about one shoe fits all. It's about equal opportunity for all, which currently doesn't exist. Have you read A WRINKLY IN TIME? Three kids have to save the world from the darkness. The darkness is trying to make everyone alike ...

• 0
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan I agree. The US shouldn't model itself exactly after Sweden. That was just a concrete example I was trying to use. HOWEVER, the US still needs to have a nationalized education system no matter how they do it. There probably isn't even a mod...

• 1
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan Exactly.

• 1
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan You are correct. Neoliberalism is just a fancy way of saying Capitalism, free trade, decentralized government, competition, but it was during the Cold War that Americans began fighting for neoliberal policies. The rich began seeing their money go awa...

• 1
• 0
• 8 months ago

Jacinda Chan In a way, negotiation with coca farmers legalizes the production of coca for certain purposes. In addition, negotiations could also include protection from Shining Path. The problem with legalizing cocaine in the US is that it will cut the profits of...

• 0
• 0
• 9 months ago

Jacinda Chan I'm sorry. Can you please clarify your argument? I don't understand.

• 0
• 0
• 9 months ago

Jacinda Chan Thank you. Although the US is the largest consumer of cocaine, Europe also consumes cocaine at a significant rate. That said, a lessened income for farmers would make Shining Path take more from farmers. Increased poverty only creates a climate for c...

• 0
• 0
• 9 months ago

Jacinda Chan Shining Path is not a marketing channel for coca. Firstly, coca farmers could ally with drug cartels in Colombia to refine their coca, which is where it goes before it is sold in the US and Europe. The problem with Colombian cartels is that they cann...

• 0
• 0
• 9 months ago