Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Provide this at the state level (Score 1) 278

Yes, the constitution is meant to be interpreted - that is the fucking job of SCOTUS per Article III of the Constitution. There is a whole area of law called "Constitutional Law" in case you are unaware of it. And just because SCOTUS decides something against how YOU interpret the constitution, doesn't mean they're making shit up. They get to say what's constitutional, not random internet guy.

Comment Re:True, but you won't like the solution (Score 1) 278

Sure it does. You're excluding the downtick caused by kids not getting in trouble as much, and going down the path of crime.

At worst, it is gonna be a wash. At best, it will dramatically lower incarceration rates (see, #1 indicator list above), even if you're correct that SOME men will end up in jail on wife beater charges. But then again, you're probably too damn afraid to try it ... because change is hard.

Actually, the huge uptick in prison population I was referring to was not caused just by the wifebeaters (OP's point #1), but also by OP's points 3 and 4.

Comment Re:Provide this at the state level (Score 1) 278

Feel free to cite other authorities that were involved in crafting the Constitution to refute that. But you won't be able to.

The original authorities involved in crafting the constitution are no longer around. Instead, we have constitutional scholars and supreme court justices. They know a lot more than some angry internet dude yelling for less government until he loses something. Fact: until SCOTUS says otherwise, DoEd is constitutional.

Well they haven't ruled either way, so we can't say that. We can say that it's assumed to be Constitutional until there is a challenge, but that's about all. The real fact is that it's a huge useless waste of billions of dollars in taxpayer funding, and that public education has only gotten worse since it was established.

I disagree on your "real fact." Without public education the great majority of people in this country would be MUCH worse off. Do you really want countless millions of illiterate people around you?

That has nothing to do with the Federal Department of Education. At all. NOTHING. We had public education before 1979, and we will have it after that useless waste of money is disbanded and nothing but a bad memory, and it will likely thrive without the boots of Common Core and No Child Left Behind and other disasters stamping on the face of responsible educators trying to help the children succeed.

That is, your idiotic straw man is just that: an idiotic straw man.

FYI: The Department of Education was established in 1867, and was later sucked into Dept of Health, Education, and Welfare in 1939, then again became it's own department in 1979, so it's been around a lot longer than you think. I was not putting up a straw man, I was under the impression you were saying that public education was a huge waste of money, not just federal funding. If you are consistent, I'm sure you'll be against Trump's proposal to spend $20B pushing federal money to the states to support vouchers.

Comment Re:Provide this at the state level (Score 1) 278

Feel free to cite other authorities that were involved in crafting the Constitution to refute that. But you won't be able to.

The original authorities involved in crafting the constitution are no longer around. Instead, we have constitutional scholars and supreme court justices. They know a lot more than some angry internet dude yelling for less government until he loses something. Fact: until SCOTUS says otherwise, DoEd is constitutional.

Well they haven't ruled either way, so we can't say that. We can say that it's assumed to be Constitutional until there is a challenge, but that's about all. The real fact is that it's a huge useless waste of billions of dollars in taxpayer funding, and that public education has only gotten worse since it was established.

I disagree on your "real fact." Without public education the great majority of people in this country would be MUCH worse off. Do you really want countless millions of illiterate people around you?

Comment Re:Provide this at the state level (Score 1) 278

Feel free to cite other authorities that were involved in crafting the Constitution to refute that. But you won't be able to.

The original authorities involved in crafting the constitution are no longer around. Instead, we have constitutional scholars and supreme court justices. They know a lot more than some angry internet dude yelling for less government until he loses something. Fact: until SCOTUS says otherwise, DoEd is constitutional.

Comment Re:Provide this at the state level (Score 1) 278

Here's my homework, teacher: Article 1, section 8: Congress may lay and collect taxes for the "common defense" or "general welfare" of the United States.

This does not equate to a power to spend tax money on (or regulate) anything "for the 'common defense' or 'general welfare'". If Congress's enumerated powers included getting involved in education, this clause would grant them the power to raise money toward that end. It does not grant that power by itself. If it did, the remainder of the section (and the entire concept of enumerated powers) would be rendered meaningless, which was obviously not the authors' or signers' intent.

Don't worry, this is a very common mistake. Your reading comprehension will improve with practice. In the meantime, perhaps you would care to read what Thomas Jefferson and James Madison had to say on the subject.

First, "obvious" in the eye of the beholder. This is especially true when it comes to the constitution - people get degrees in that shit. Second, snarky "your reading comprehension" lines don't help your point. Third, if DoEd is unconstitutional, why hasn't someone sued to get the Feds out of Education. Short answer: the Supreme Court would laugh at your interpretation.

Comment Re:No different from China (Score 1) 253

I'll be glad to tell you the difference. In China, the censorship is from the government; this article is referring to private businesses. Clear enough?

Yeah, the government has nothing to do with this: https://tech.slashdot.org/stor...

Keep on keeping on. Critical thought is not required in order to live.

What was the difference again? Oh right. One government person can not arbitrarily decide something can be censored, like in China. It has to be a group of government people. All the difference in the world.

It's quite a difference when the censorship is done by the people with the guns as opposed to the people selling shiny stuff.

Comment Re:No different from China (Score 1) 253

Tell me how this is any different than what China does, then. You might as well have a Ministry of Truth.

I'll be glad to tell you the difference. In China, the censorship is from the government; this article is referring to private businesses. Clear enough?

It's still chilling and pervasive censorship!? You can call the oppressors what you will, they are still oppressors of human freedom. Who has more real power in the world: companies, governments... people? Will you actually be allowed to see this message? Think for yourself

It's quite a difference when the censorship is done by the people with the guns as opposed to the people selling shiny stuff.

Comment Re:True, but you won't like the solution (Score 1) 278

Not sure if you replied to who you wanted to. But I was saying that Ending no-fault divorce would create an uptick in domestic violence and that the other provisions listed by MikeRT would create an uptick in jail population. Your response has nothing to do with that.

Comment Re:hail Trump (Score 1) 278

Yes, and it was a decocrat presidency that shot it off when the environment seems to change: more American programmers now may mean more Americans with a decent job, not more price erosion of programmer's wages.

So you AREN'T paying attention. It's the republican Congress that refuses to fund it.

Comment Re:Not Fed (Score 2) 278

>" I am hopeful that this language may translate into support for funding K-12 computer science at a federal level."

The Constitution does not grant the Fed power or authority over education in any way and so those rights/powers/responsibilities belong solely to the States. Of course, 3/4 of what the Fed does is unconstitutional so why even point this out?

Article I, Section 8 enumerates the powers delegated to the legislature. Financially, Congress has the power to tax, borrow, pay debt and provide for the common defense and the general welfare.

It's so sad reading bullshit like this. The "general welfare" there was never interpreted to give them the power to do *anything*, which is what confused people like you believe. It also doesn't give the federal government the ability to get into healthcare, and not even the left-wingers on the current SCOTUS believe that.

The federal government literally has no legal authority to do anything with education. The Department of Education was created during the Carter presidency int he late 1970s - 180 years after the Constitution was put into place. Every other actual legal function of the US government was put into place immediately after the Constitution was ratified.

Though you may think your opinion is final, it's SCOTUS that decides such matters - so far no challenges. You may think that the DoED was created in the Carter Admin, but it dates WAY back before that. You are aware that Dept of Health, Education, and Welfare, which dates back to 1939? That was created from the Dept of Education which Congress created in 1867. And land was set aside for public schools by the Congress of the Confederation in 1785. Oh, now your 180 years claim vaporized.

No it didn't. The Constitution was ratified in 1788. Public schools are a function of the states. I don't know how it was handled here in TN, but where I'm from in Indiana the counties are made up of townships, each being 36 square miles. Of those, 1 was set aside for schools with part of the land sold to raise money.

It's not a federal issue, and never was.

Yes it is, hence there is a Dept of Education. You may not like it, but that's the way it is. Go sue the feds if you don't like it. Maybe the Supreme Court will see it your way, but I bet they won't.

Comment Re:Provide this at the state level (Score 1) 278

Like most "originalists" you think your interpretation of the constitution is the only one. I didn't say "general welfare" was THE justification for DoED, but it is adequate in my opinion. And of course you think the Federalist Papers have any weight at all.

Comment Re:Not Fed (Score 1) 278

>" I am hopeful that this language may translate into support for funding K-12 computer science at a federal level."

The Constitution does not grant the Fed power or authority over education in any way and so those rights/powers/responsibilities belong solely to the States. Of course, 3/4 of what the Fed does is unconstitutional so why even point this out?

Article I, Section 8 enumerates the powers delegated to the legislature. Financially, Congress has the power to tax, borrow, pay debt and provide for the common defense and the general welfare.

It's so sad reading bullshit like this. The "general welfare" there was never interpreted to give them the power to do *anything*, which is what confused people like you believe. It also doesn't give the federal government the ability to get into healthcare, and not even the left-wingers on the current SCOTUS believe that.

The federal government literally has no legal authority to do anything with education. The Department of Education was created during the Carter presidency int he late 1970s - 180 years after the Constitution was put into place. Every other actual legal function of the US government was put into place immediately after the Constitution was ratified.

Though you may think your opinion is final, it's SCOTUS that decides such matters - so far no challenges. You may think that the DoED was created in the Carter Admin, but it dates WAY back before that. You are aware that Dept of Health, Education, and Welfare, which dates back to 1939? That was created from the Dept of Education which Congress created in 1867. And land was set aside for public schools by the Congress of the Confederation in 1785. Oh, now your 180 years claim vaporized.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Why waste negative entropy on comments, when you could use the same entropy to create bugs instead?" -- Steve Elias

Working...