Well, now you know how I feel every time someone assumes I want to let the poor rot in a gutter.
Point taken. But you yourself pulled the old "communism versus capitalism" trick a few posts back, which is just as bad. To be entitled to an opinion, one ought to be aware of, and affirmative toward, the necessary consistencies of principle required by taking a given position.
You can't honestly tell me that everyone who shares your viewpoints actually does it for any substantive reason.
You have a second point here, but again you are off the bullseye. Why? Because you presume that "my viewpoints" are shared by a mass audience. At the level of specific issues, there are plenty of people who take a similar position as mine, but on the whole there are very few people who have put enough thinking power into their worldview to arrive at viewpoints most of which similar to mine. Those people tend to be well-reasoned, contrary to your assertion.
The reason I give you partial credit is that you were probably talking about "liberals," or, maybe a shade more specific, such movements as the "feminists" and "environmentalists," and the people who adopt ideology from these communities without thinking it through on their own to a sufficient degree. And, sure enough, these people are a problem.
But be that as it may, I'd like to know how free education for all is feasible. I know that public universities in several other countries are free; how do they make it work? Near as I can tell, the only countries that can do that are relatively small.
Many countries, from Canada to Australia, have either subsidized, deferred, or totally free tuition for higher education. It's no mystery how they do it. No new infrastructure has to be built, nothing has to change about the way schools are run (sans the bursar's office), and nobody gets squashed by the system. The way to fund it is to make it a spending priority, at the expense of other, less worthy programs, and to raise taxes to make up the rest.
