We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
I was alive then, and I'm not that old. I remember life without an Education Department, for example. We somehow learned the times-table and how to diagram sentences without the "help" of the federal government, and also without mandatory teacher certification. The guys who put men on the moon all went to grade school before even the first New Math, much less the Education Department.
To the question "why should taxpayers fund college sports" the answer is "Title IX". As usual the government stuck their nose in where it did not belong and created a mess so they should pay for it. If colleges were allowed to run their sports programs like a business then they would actually make money with them. Instead the government saw a chance to pander and forced schools to implement "sports" that no one wanted to watch or play just to meet a quota. Who should pay for these????
I agree wholeheartedly that students should not be expected to pay one dime towards the costs associated with the athletic program unless they buy a ticket to go to the games. I do feel the need to point out that comparisons between coaches compensation and professors is not a valid one. Coaches can be fired at any time for performance reasons, professors get tenure that protects them, as well as some eye-popping pensions and benefits, at least in the state of Illinois. Their pay is also several times what the average worker makes
This is a great article. I have forwarded it to several times over, probably for the same reason we have it here on "Maggie's Farm". Thank you Bird Dog.
One closing note:
You may want to compare the Estonia governance to your own, personal governments (city, county, etc.). Go ahead. Drop by your local Building Department. It is an enlightening experience. (For Masochists it is positively thrilling.)
I would hazard an educated guess that the longer a marriage endures, the more important friendship with the other spouse is. I've known and seen marriages which have endured without it, but it's a lot harder work to maintain it. I remember reading an article by the French writer Colette about the best marriages and how they work best [yes, indeed. She was married more than once herself]. One point she made stuck in my mind. She suggested that the married pair should always be as polite to each other as they would be to strangers. "Surely," she said, "you owe your spouse the greatest of courtesy... the kind of courtesy you would give to a very important stranger."
Interestingly enough, her last husband was twenty years younger than she, and is reputed to have adored her.
Which suggests that lucky Colette was even luckier than the infamous "lucky Pierre."