[wredcoll]

"Resources are finite" is a trite observation that so rarely helps us discuss actual real world issues.

As an easy example, food in america is not finite in any meaningful way. There is, in fact, quite a bit of it. Making sure students in government schools aren't going hungry really isn't an issue of finite resources, it's much more complicated than that.

[CamperBob2]

Largely agreed. It's no surprise that a government elected by a brainwashed populace will treat public education as a threat to be eliminated rather than as a goal to be achieved.

But how does that answer the question of how resources -- which are still finite no matter how much you insist otherwise, given that it takes money to distribute food -- should be allocated? If we leave it up to the government, or to the people who elected said government, it's irrational to expect a fair outcome.

[fuzzfactor]

>TANSTAAFL

Well you can't expect 100-year-old memes to die any time soon ;)

Famous saying coined by those who prefer a dog-eat-dog rat race and whose life's work often consists of urging things to grow closer to making this more universal.

When you do the math about the USA, there's been nothing free ever since the end of WWII. Any "giveaways" were already paid for well in advance by the sacrifices that were made back then.

The government could be providing gourmet cuisine to schoolchildren across-the-board by now, there would be far fewer underprivileged anyway if the "war dividend" would have been invested halfway wisely instead of being squandered mindlessly, or maliciously as the case may be.