[Oe List ...] rampant socialism

Sat Aug 29 17:39:50 CDT 2009

Susan, just get over it and think seriously about where our nation would be if we didn't have some version of a right to public education. If the public school system didn't exist. We so take that for granted that not even the right wing nut cases are proposing a totally privatized educational system (I hope!).

I'm aware of two major examples of the dangers of a public-private mix (or mess).

One is California's famous Prop 13 (1978) Jarvis initiative that lowered property taxes and sank our public school system from highly rated to very poorly rated. This set up a two-tier system in which the rich folks sent their kids to private schools while paying much lower taxes to subsidize public schools.

The other is Charlotte's court-mandated school busing (now rescinded) which, in my view, drained the school system of public support (guess what? the rich white folks sent their kids to private schools while paying much lower taxes to subsidize public schools) and dramatically 'leveled down' or reduced the quality of public education in the system. (Full disclosure: I'm a 'product' of Charlotte's formerly excellent [and segregated] public school system . . . but unlike those living on the wrong side of the tracks, I was privileged to attend one of the top public high schools in the country--class of 1958.)

In the health care system the concept of medical 'standards of care' supports a minimal level of quality care. Not so in our educational system. There is no standard of excellence in teaching, just an imposed 'teach to the test' method to prepare students to be tested. But at least every child has the right to some version of public education (including home schooling--don't get me started on that!).

More later on health care 'reform.'

For a clear perspective on the health care mess, just "follow the money" to see who's raking it in.

Marshall 

________________________________
From: Susan Fertig <susan at gmdtech.com>
To: Order Ecumenical Community <oe at wedgeblade.net>
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:49:33 AM
Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] all the earth belongs to all the people

Jack and Paul, First of all, I appreciate your taking my 
question seriously and not just dismissing it as uncaring or 
unthinking.

Next, I think what has always distinguished people of 
successful community is that they CHOOSE to care for each other.  Not that 
there is a governing body (the Soviet?) requiring it and thereby diminishing to 
nothing the human spirit.

Finally, I do not believe that anyone or any 
government "owes" me medical care, or food, or a home, or a car, or any of 
the things that everyone seems to take for granted. If I am unable to provide 
those things for myself, then I truly do hope there will be kind and generous 
people who will help me.  But not, please God, my 
government.

I have been so dismayed by our pell mell helter skelter 
descent into socialism within an oh-so-short handful of months that I am no 
longer a conservative.  I have lost all balance I ever had and have fallen 
right over into libertarianism (not, of course, the LaRouche style 
version).  

Susan

Susan 
Fertig-Dykes
tel: 
(703) 751-5956

________________________________
 From: oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net 
[mailto:oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net] On Behalf Of Jack 
Gilles
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 12:09 PM
To: Order 
Ecumenical Community
Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] all the earth belongs 
to all the people

Dear Susan, 

I too think this is a question that needs a thoughtful answer.  I am 
grateful for Paul's response as it is, as it should be, from the heart which is 
the means by which this community dialogues.

I remember JWM reminding us that first and foremost we were born into 
humanity, not family, community or nation.  Therefore, it is the humanity 
of us all that we stand before as equals, and with a mutual responsibility. 
 That said, each of us has a responsibility for how that life is lived and 
cared for.  We bare the responsibility for our actions, including those 
that lead to consequences of illness and poor well-being.  But there are 
issues of wellness that are beyond our individual control, be those of birth, 
accident or social circumstances.  For these we need to ask, whom will be 
responsible for the healing and care?  In that question it is clear that 
our (USA) social structures and consciousness is in need of strengthening, 
including our understanding of death.

We all know of the issues of families not willing to care for, nor honor 
the dignity and role of elders in their lives.  We have developed vast 
industries to hide this responsibility, to render the elders subservient to 
youth and deny a legitimate profound role in our collective community.  We 
also know that we have lost community in and through which care needs to be 
acted out.  We have seen so many fine examples of community care including 
many that have financial structural designs that seem to work well.  In a 
"perfect world" perhaps this model of caring community with equitable structures 
would be what we need to build.  I would share with what I imagine is your 
concern that once a "right" is designated at such a large level as the US 
economy and society things not only get complicated and often too expensive, but 
it keeps us from facing the more ontological needs of building our local 
communities and our individual responsibilities for ourselves and our neighbors. 
  It hinders the necessary dialogue on what care should we collectively 
render (i.e. unlimited end of life treatments at all costs, who gets transplants 
etc.).   We have a very profound dialogue that needs to occur around these 
issues that isn't taking place, at least at a national level.  In other 
words, the issue of "the right of care for all" when implied at the national 
level, is not dealing with the contradictions and therefore, I believe, will not 
lead to the solutions we need to develop.  Without elaboration, we who live 
in the Litibu community of Mexico are presently facing such community care 
issues.

That said, it remains to say which present options being discussed will 
take us towards our goal of all of us caring for all in a way that brings us 
into full mutual love and responsibility.  I am not totally clear as to 
which model does that and what model keeps us further away from the real 
contradictions of our common good.

Grace & Peace,

Jack

On Aug 29, 2009, at 2:46 AM, PSchrijnen at aol.com wrote:

Why? What a great question, Susan.
> 
>I was on top of Table Mountain yesterday. The cable car and facilities on 
>  top of the mountain were refurbished about 10 years ago, and Mandela opened 
>  it: declaring it SA's gift to the earth. He declared it so. An act of 
>  generosity.  Of hope. And most people on top of the mountain were South 
>  Africans, most of them black, but there were accents and shades of all colours 
>  of the rainbow. 
> 
>So, thanks Susan, for letting me ponder that question.
> 
>By the way, the top of Table Mountain is sacred space. There is an awe in 
>  the air. People whisper thoughtfully, aware of the presence of the mystery. I 
>  wept at times in the presence of this perspective on the beautiful earth on 
>  which I live. 
> 
>Paul
><table%20mountain.JPG>
> _______________________________________________
>OE 
>  mailing list
>OE at wedgeblade.net
>http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/oe_wedgeblade.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/oe_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20090829/35fe921b/attachment.html>