So BHS, how are you going to support those kids whose parents can't afford private schooling in your wonderful system? Just fuck them and leave them out to dry right?
How about you read my arguments first before you accuse me of such b.s? I set out clearly:
The market itself produces outcomes that are desirable for society as a whole: It will ultimately lift those who can't support their children out of poverty, for cases (which now will be lower than otherwise) where individuals cannot genuinely provide for themselves, SMALL government and voluntary societies would have a duty of care.
I can't blame you though, for not being able to process information and understand the logic of argument, you probably attended a public school and can only view argument through the perspective of your own misinformed emotional attachments.
And I find it funny that you paint me as some 'survival of the fittest', 'f*** the poor' kind of person - the reality is, YOUR ideology, your socialist principles, they are what cause and entrench poverty. It's your morally retarted view of compassion; this centralised ideology of paternalism
i.e. 'we know what's best for you indigenous community' that leads to poor social outcomes and does NOT set out what it aims to do. And if you can't understand that because of your skewed view of history or economics, that's your problem. (Or probably the problem of the university professor who taught you b.s to begin with)
