"Obama wants to tax ppl making over a million which is not 'the wealthy'"
Epic fail. That is all.
"I would love
anyone here to give me just 1 example of something the govt has run better than the private sector."
"Also, there has NEVER been an instance when raising taxes has created a single job."
Reagan raised taxes in the 80s and jobs were created. Same thing happened with Clinton. We can't forget that during the 50s to early 60s, tax rates for the wealthy were upwards of 90%. We still had jobs. As a matter of fact it was called the most prosperous time for the middle class.
"The post office for example is $15 billion dollars in debt because the gov't runs it, however UPS had $46
billion in revenue and $2.2 billion in profit last year. FexEx, DHL, etc all made billions too last year and
The post office is running into debt because barely anyone sends mail anymore. We all communicate through email and social networking. You see that pile of mail you have on your counter? That's nothing compared the piles of mail that existed before the invention of email. It's not that the USPS has been ran to the ground. It's because of technology the service has started to become obsolete.
FedEx, UPS, and DHL have government contracts. A huge chunk of their revenue comes from the FED. Plus they deliver packages. You cant send a package instantaniously. The moment teleportation is invented, you'll see those companies start to lose revenue as well.
"I cant wait for the gov't to run my healthcare"
You're gonna have to move to Canada for that to happen. And even there it probably won't happen. Canada still has some private options. And the government doesn't even "run it". You and the doctor still make all your decisions. The doctor just sends the govt the bill instead of it showing up in your mail.
Per your story however, it seems both the professor and the students were confused on what socialism is. It's not supposed to be a "great equalizer". What the professor just experimented in was communist despotism where everyone gets exactly the same thing. That's not socialism.
What would be socialism is if the professor told the students to not bring any books, paper, or pencils/pens to the class and he would provide it all. The means of producing the work is essentially owned by one body, the professor. But the OUPUT of the work is up to the student.
OR, if the professor told the students to pull all their funds together to get the books, paper, and pencils/pens and let them all work together in groups for in all the tests and classwork.
THAT is socialism.
Not only that, the story can actually be used to argue against the free market in some instances. How? The Free Rider Problem. Your story is a classic case of that happening. The professor can represent a privatized public good in which everyone is supposed to benefit from. But since other students are paying into this and we'll all get the same benefit, others won't pay. Privatizing everything doesn't always work.
That being said, I agree that we have a spending problem. The point of contention is where the spending should be cut.
Can I ask one suggestion for you? Is it possible you can post in paragraphs? Nothing personal. It's just really hard to read your posts when they come in one wall of text.