You don't have a right to either.
...Que the line of people who don't understand the fundamentals on which this country was founded who think it obviously is.
You have a right to your life, and a right to your liberty. In a truly free market jobs are always made available because overhead (such as tax) aren't there. Or are there to a much lesser degree.
Before 1979 education wasn't a federal issue. Before that kids were arguably smarter than they've ever been. So why is federal education a good idea?
In different states you hold different values. In Maine your overall thought process is different than that of those in California. By handling public education on federal level what are you hoping to achieve?
Here's a little history lesson from between the Victorian Era and the 20th century era. Draw similarities and read it over.
The Path To The Welfare State (England)
The negative ideas of the 20th century took away the people's understanding of the worth of the individual soul. If man were merely an animal, then he would not need to be treated as a responsible individual. Society, rather than the individual, became the focus of attention of the English public.
Social planners rationalized that for the good of society, individual ambitions and convictions might have to be sacrificed (sound familiar to the earlier part of this century in the US?) The novelist George Orwell (1903-1950) graphically described the dangers of this attitude and thought process in his novels 1984, which predicted the grim future of English Socialism, and Animal Farm, a brilliant satire on the realities of Communism.
Many writers hastened England's decay by using their talents to attack and Christianity and promote the materialism thought the redistribution of wealth. George Bernard Shaw and H.G Wells, for instance, were prominent members of the Fabian Society of Socialists, and they dedicated their creative abilities to socialist and anti-Christian causes. They rejected the idea that responsible individuals are what makes society good and called for
direct government intervention in economic affairs to remove economic inequality.
The Fabian Society played a large part in the formation of the Labour Party, which began shortly after the turn of the twentieth century.
During the Victorian Era (the era just before the 20th century era), the greatest reforms in England had been brought about by concerned individuals who took upon themselves the responsibility of helping people who were in need. The political reformers at the end of the nineteenth century had concerned themselves with reforms toward political freedom and freedom of thought and speech and had carefully refrained from intervening in the private affairs of individuals and families.
They had realized that if the government assumes the individuals responsibilities, the light of true freedom will be dimmed.
The YMCA and The Salvation Army are just a few of the programs that have stood the test of time. Started by individual that cared, not by a heat-less big government.
As the twentieth centruy dawned, powerful forces were at work to bring about a different kind of reform.
The first changes were made in the schools. In Victorian England (just a few decades before), education had been viewed as a way to train the individual to use his own, unique abilities to help his fellow man and succeed in whichever way he so chose. Every student was different so why teach them all in the same way?
Educators aimed at developing the ability, improving the habits, and forming the character of the individual so that he could conform to his chosen career. The new philosophies of the twentieth century called for a new philosophy towards education. Education came to be viewed as the most advanced phase of the evolutionary process; the new goal of education was to adjust the individual to his environment and to control the child for the sake of welfare and society. To teach everyone in the same way. Curriculum, discipline, and teaching methods were revised to fit this goal.
In 1899, a centralized Board of Education was created. In 1902, the Balfour Education Act was passed, despite vigorous protests by groups. The act reorganized the administration of secondary and elementary schools and laid the foundations for a national system of secondary education (public schools). Most important, it gave tax money to the voluntary schools and brought them under the control of the public education authorities.
From this time on, the central government became increasingly involved in education, and traditional education was looked down upon as "old-fashioned". An opening worship ceremony and religious instruction were required in all tax-aided schools, but as the century progressed and Humanism became commonplace this was forced to stop.
Academic standards deteriorated to levels never before imaginable in these newly formed "public" schools.
Today, only about 5% of England's schools are completely independent of the government. The most famous of these, the private high schools that are called public schools in England (examples would be Eton, Harrow, and Winchester), have traditionally emphasized character, discipline, and high scholarship, and they have turned out a high percentage of Britain's leaders (including the last two).
In recent years, attempts have been made by the government to incorporate these schools into the government system.
End
Basically all this is saying is that the government dumbed down the privileged and the poor. Note that all kids that wanted to go to school could. Church run schools, often called "ragged schools", took in any child and gave them a proper eduction.
The parents, not the government, made the call.
When the government came in these private schools were forced to shut down due to pressures and taxation. They were giving charity but weren't aloud to. Choices were eliminated and it was either expensive private school or public school - just like it is now.
The government in an attempt to give more choice took it all away. Reading further into this era you'll realize that in the Victorian Era it was truly a free market and England then prospered more than any other time period.
...Anyone who wanted a job could get a job. There wasn't a "poor class" per say. You had those that wouldn't get a job, the drunks, the mentally ill. But that was a very small portion of the population.
What you saw was that those that worked hard, and worked long, could get by very well. You saw that the majority were middle class, a lesser amount were rich, and very few were poor (homeless).
Moving into the 20th century as taxation, and regulation gripped the nation the official "poor class" was born and it boomed. During times when social programs were being rolled out heavily more people were becoming poor.
What scares me. What really scares me...
Is that England today, arguably, accepts it's socialist ways. They have been around for years and years and are ingrained in their blood. For years, nearly a century, people fought so hard to go back to what it was like in the Victorian Era during the 20th century. Revolts were everywhere, people were dying for their country. Just like during the civil war for the Americans.
...But as the politicians wouldn't change and as the fighters slowly died off over time the fighting died and the practices/laws were accepted.
Right now there's a little fight, a little spark in the step of those angry at the government. But for how long? How long do we keep down this path and accept all the taxation and regulation that has occurred over the past century?
When will the fight die? We're already so far from where we were supposed to be and there's been little fighting for our rights, for our constitution.
So now what? In a few months they'll be another huge strive to socialism and another huge strive to the destruction of America. What are you going to do about it?
If nothing is done, if nothing happens, if voices aren't heard, I can guarantee you one thing. America will never see another time of economic boom lasting more than three years (if there's ever a true economic boom again).
