A bit like Microsoft, yes. But MS would've been more like "Sell/give us your technology for next-to-nothing, or we'll buy someone else's inferior competing software, market the fuck out of it, and ruin you."
Nay, one page. If it's so large you can't fit the details on a single page, you need to pass another bill.
Each bill MUST be read before the house/senate before being brought to vote; reading occurs directly prior to the vote; anyone not present for the reading can not vote on the bill.
Damn, your Presidential Agenda is almost identical to mine (except for the July 4th one, which I'd not thought of). However, I've got a couple extra:
- Go back to the gold standard for currency (or at the very least, get rid of the Fed). - Prohibit the government to go into debt except for, and in time of, war - via Amendment. In the event such a thing happens, there would be an immediate election. - Return the selection of Representatives and Congressmen to the States: no direct elections. This will keep them more beholden to their "electorate" as they would be representing the state (and a significantly smaller body of State politicians they simply can't ignore, as they do the populace at large).
Actually, you might want to look at the timeline of Roman history again. Hint: the US went from "Republic" to "Empire" in 1861. The US has, in terms of 'great nations' had a very punctuated timeline. We're approaching the rough timeline equivalent of the Byzantine split: barbarians were at the gates, the bread and circuses did nothing to help, and Rome had greatly over-extended itself in military conquest (losing many of its later battles).
However, unlike Rome, I don't think the conquerors will be so happy to adopt our culture and ways of life. If anything, "ethnodiversity" will win out, I think.
Any polarization at this point is not going to end well, for anyone. We've got the government (at all levels, except a handful of states and smaller cities) clamping down on civil liberties, raising taxes, and increasing the size of the government. We've got politicians showing wanton disregard and contempt for their electorate at town hall meetings. And we've got people coming - armed with loaded rifles slung over their shoulders - to these town hall meetings (and nothing happening to them except for the media using them to spread lies about their skin color and political affiliations).
Ask yourself: if those "armed protesters" had shown up at the anti-illegal immigration rallies after those massive May Day pro-immigration rallies in DC and Phoenix several years ago, what would've happened? I guarantee you that the government wouldn't have minced words much, to put it gently. Now, things are too tense to even approach 'retribution'.
The way I see it, it was either a political joke, or a real moon rock was given (remember, this was some time ago) and someone at the Dutch museum (say, the curator of the day) either sold it or kept it for himself. It's also possible that a couple astronauts had a little fun, too: just like things like, say, ammunition are commonplace and of no need for particular attention to a soldier, so might moon rocks be to the astronauts who took a couple shovelfuls of 'em on the moon. "Hey, Buzz, I found another golram moon rock in my dresser drawer this morning. Damn irritating. Hey, why don't we prank the Dutch?"
Of course, the only explanation left after that is that aliens wanted their terra luna back.:P
I loathe the apparent devolution of language and despise the rampant misspellings, poor grammar, and horrific stream of consciousness run-ons I've witnessed on the boards and in gameplay.
Ehhrrhhhrhhhhhhh = sound of you taking a deep breath.
The evident reason is so that, in the event of social dissent or uprising, they can cut off the communication of those dissenting. See: Iran just a month ago.
"Oh, it's been legal for years. Why would anyone care when they started to do it now if they didn't care when the law was passed?"
Surely, though, the Democrats will not abuse this. Surely. We have nothing to worry about.
You've got at least some coverage in the Dickinson area. A cursory look at maps shows they at least advertise -some- coverage there. Coverage maps show no coverage here.
My friend on ATT claims that he usually gets better coverage on his ranch near Ashby, NE and across that state than Verizon customers do. I believe him, because I don't think he'd be using the service otherwise.
Forget the iPhone. IMO, it was obsolete when it came out (feature for feature, half what Windows Mobile 6 is). Shoot, the iPhone doesn't even do multitasking and you could only recently change default sounds (I think). That's nuts. Linux (Maemo and Android, as well as others) and WinMo phones, Blackberry, and the like will be providing a great deal more functionality and become much more ubiquitous.
The center of that "no coverage" area? That's where I live - in the Black Hills of South Dakota. I can't even get AT&T to ignore me, it's so bad.
But I've got a friend who comes here on occasion; he's from here, see, so he's got a legitimate reason and everything! The thing is, he's got AT&T.
I live in a canyon and have Verizon. I do not get signal anywhere but on the third story of the house. He, on the other hand, gets it throughout the house - yes, GSM signal, as his phone(s) lack CDMA chipsets. This seems to be mostly true out here; if AT&T has no coverage, there is at least a carrier which will take your signal for GSM.
It's not about intelligence. Sure, that's a part of it - and intelligent people are often depressed as a result. But there's more to intelligence than that.
You can see all the gritty, shitty things about life and still be a happy, cheerful person. How? Shut it out. I'm not saying ignore it, I'm saying shut it out from your emotional 'center' and be your own person. I guess this might be considered "wisdom", if such a thing is still considered present in the minds of man.
It seems to me that entirely too many geeky types think because they're depressed, they are intelligent. They see things others don't - or things they think others don't - so therefore they're smarter. Do they even consider that others who may be more intelligent than they are shut such things out and chose to not dwell on what serves no purpose in dwelling?
Agreed: Nintendo really needs to drop the Wii price, probably in tiers up through Christmas. It's been the same price since the Christmas before last Christmas, which is kinda nuts considering (as the other guy said) there've been no 'killer apps' for a while.
Regardless of whether they targeted the Wii at kids or not, there is only so much that can be done with cinematic-brandings using LEGO concepts. They haven't even bothered to release (and improve upon) that many Nintendo classics, for that matter. If they'd have done that, I'd have bought one a while ago.
You're correct, but you've already taken care of the difficult part: you've gotten the correct kids into the correct required courses with at least 70% of the task completed. The last class of the day is, typically, band, choir, art, or some other "non required" class in high school, to the best of my experience. That kind of thing - as well as sorting 10% of the kids around to the appropriate classes so they can take their necessary classes.
In the meantime, the majority of the kids are taking classes they need to take to finish high school. Chances it will be mostly right, as modern school programs have seen to any cultural statistic outliers: the stupid ones go to special class, as do the smart ones, so there's no need to schedule for AP or much.
Uh yeah, classes like that have been around for a while.
Your "WTF moment" should've been brought to you by the "interested in fashion design" statement, not the fact that there were piano (music) and sewing (home economics) courses.
Teachers may be some of the least-paid workers out there, but they've got a third of the year to do whatever they want. They're likely making significantly more than the average mid-level IT worker, per hour; moreso for the ones who are tenured and are about to retire.
Spend the school year (while their own kids are in school) teaching classes and have the summer off with them to do what you want, and make a couple dozen thou in the process. Are you kidding me? Fuck yeah, that's a great deal.
Hmm, maybe they could find somewhere to trim their budgets, then? Surely they don't need 1 computer per every other child (and have only a fraction of the computers available for use at any one time), many rooms unused throughout the day due to scheduling, and half their budgets focused on sports every year?
My wife was "not allowed" to graduate high school early, even though she had (or would have had, if they'd let her take a full course load) the requisite credits and courses. They made one of her required classes "full" so she had to wait to take it, just so they could count another student, and thus pick up the $2500 for her "attendance" for another semester. This, in part, so the high school Super could drive around in a Lexus.
Dude, seriously. I feel your pain - as one of those kids who jumped from school to school because they were too dumb and I was bored. My parents were quite worried that I had not really started reading (I could read, just didn't) until 3rd grade.
I was in a total of 9 school districts (3 private schools inclusive) throughout K-12 - and I was homeschooled for the majority of middle school years (6th through 9th grades). This isn't in one region, it's in half a dozen different towns in 3 different states 500+ miles from each other.
Take the kid out of school and "home school" him. If you have to, give him books and lock him in a room and tell him to "entertain himself". He will still learn more, because his mind will be engaged (if, for no other reason, because he's got nothing else to do).
If you have to, ferret him into work in a 4U server box and stick him in the corner - then ask him what he learned "at school" on the car trip home. Chances are, he'll learn more in a day which will stick with him than he does in a whole week of school.
I say those things somewhat tongue in cheek, but seriously: there are very few good schools out there, regardless of money or location, public or private. If your kids are even moderately intelligent/above average (as I am - not uber-intelligent but certainly brighter than average, no small part due to my upbringing) they will be bored and unchallenged.
Like you, my children will not see the inside of a public school building (and, most likely, not the inside of a private one, either). I will "shoot it out" with CPS/whatever agents before they're sent away like that. I love them too much.
My son is currently 5; due to new early-start laws, we've got to register him for school already. They (the federal government) is trying to take our kids from us at an earlier and earlier age. I went to kindergarten in NY at the age of 7; I was a year oler than most of my classmates due to when my birthday fell in the year, but at the same time, it was required at 6. Now it's 5. When my mom was a kid (at the same kindergarten), kindergarten was not even required.
As far as education of children at home: as I said, my son is 5. I have made no 'concerted' effort in teaching him anything except what he is interested in. If he asks a question, I guide him in finding the answer for himself or I answer it. He knows the alphabet, can almost count (and write) to 20 (and after you're past the "teens", it's easy-peezy), and knows more about the natural world than most high schoolers. He plays with legos, draw, and plays with his sister for most of the day.
Most importantly, though: he is using his brain, and he is not behind his peers by any stretch of the imagination. He is interacting with adults (I work from home, as does my wife) on a daily basis, is learning proper adult etiquette, and is one step closer (than he was and than others his age) to becoming half of what childhood is about: an adult.
The other half is about playing and having fun. And even that "fun" stuff has lessons for adulthood: skinning your knee, falling from a tree, or getting sprayed by a skunk all have life lessons you are likely to not forget.
(Sorry for the rambling nature; Friday started a day early for me this week.)
Sir, I congratulate you for your insight into this matter, being as you are neither an American or a "conservative". Very few people realize today - even, or maybe especially, Americans - that the US Federal government is more synonymous with Brussels than it is with, say, London or Berlin.
The US was formed with (at the time, 13) sovereign states in the vein of the states of ancient Greece: autonomous in government, civics, and citizenry. But unlike Greece of yore, it was formed with a national government and a constitution with an attempt to retain unity amongst the states - both politically and culturally. They did not want to see the destructive in-fighting that the Greeks experienced, despite their common "Greekness".
Unfortunately, that all kind of snowballed here in the United States 150 years ago when we had that little Federalists vs. Secessionists conflict. That, as well as subsequent and repeated Federal malfeasance, has resulted in a great deal of mistrust in said Federal government. The comparison to Brussels is true to a large degree for many Americans.
Fire departments: except for 'disaster' stimuluses since 9/11, they are entirely funded at the local (or state) level. Police departments: likewise, except for post-9/11 and similar funding; again, it makes up a minor part of their operational budgets. Libraries: almost entirely funded at the local level. Federal ('public') schools: at least half the funding of the majority of schools comes from local tax payers; the state likewise puts a substantial amount towards schools. Before No Child Left Behind (and similar initiatives), the federal monies were less than 1/3 total funding.
If the federal government ceased to exist tomorrow, most municipality and civil services would continue to exist just fine. In fact, many would be better off, as there'd be less paperwork to cut through to actually meet your mandates of "protect and serve", "educate and inform" and the like.
Yes, the school district paid for the program. They paid a shitton for what should be a very simple program: manage schedules, 'notes' on discipline, and grades (which are directly related to the schedules for under 10k students. This should be, what, 4 database tables?
They are, essentially, paying over $512 per student for this software. (Hopefully this is not a reoccurring cost and comes with at least several years of free upgrades - so that, you know, it'll work). That's a crazy amount of money for any record-keeping software, and there is no possible way such a cost could be justified by a private institution. But instead of real, actual oversight, the public school system gets gobs of money per student.
Chances are, the school system will hide this colossal loss and dig the 20-year-old terminals and terminal servers from the janitorial closet, pretending they never made the purchase. They'll just go back to doing what they did for the past 20 years: claiming budgeting deficits, charging students for minor damage to books, and giving the school's sports programs millions each year.
I went to a very nice private school where the per-student annual operational cost was a fraction (about 1/3, after including federal, state, and local monies) of what the local school spent on each student per semester. The private school's computer labs were roughly as good as the local public school's labs (though nowhere near as excessive); the private school built an $8 million new building the year after I left (after the old building got washed away in a flood the year prior), classes were smaller, and the private school had higher GPAs/better standardized test scores. Part of that last bit is due to the whole "affluence" thing, but the rest can't be looked at in such a fashion: the public schools waste money on stupid, trivial things which have nothing to do with education.
Government schools throw money down the drain for trivial, useless, and untested things simply because they can. (The public school district put in half a dozen labs my freshman year; there was roughly one computer for every 4 students, and no more than one was ever open at any one time.)
As for government healthcare... you can bet that it'll be run to a large degree by the federal government - probably much in the same fashion as the Veteran Hospitals are (ie poorly). The rest will be outsourced to (wait for it) the private sector. This is just like every other government function: the private sector does the actual work while a massive government "oversight" committee/organization reviews everything for compliance (resulting in a much, much higher cost to the government due to private sector contracting).
There's a reason why government has traditionally moved slower than the need requires (and moreso the larger the government): they make a lot of goddamn paperwork, and it takes time to shuffle it. Yes, that's simplified, but it's also not far off the mark.
Just to play devil's advocate: why do you owe them even 2-weeks notice? I'm fairly certain most employers will never say "hey, we're looking to replace you/cut your position back. We'll keep you on for two more weeks, but you'll have to leave after that".
Companies have been doing the drop-them-like-its-hot thing for decades, to little repercussion. Meanwhile - and unlike a company, which is able to distribute its costs and performance across multiple employees - you are up shit creek: best case scenario, you've got one other person (a spouse or dedicated friend/girlfriend) helping with your cost of living. If you lose your job, you're fucked: you're dipping into savings and collecting unemployment (for a limited time only). Just hope you don't get cut lose shortly after being hired out of college and/or a career change, or you'll have neither the unemployment or (likely) much of a savings to fall back on.
In short, the penalty to a company for your instant-quit is marginal compared to the hardship they put an employee through with a termination. It's not even reasonably comparable, and morally speaking, much more reasonable to accept the customer bailing w/o the two weeks than the company bailing w/o any notice.
(However, it is most certainly a moral imperative to give those 2-weeks notice if you said you would, whether in writing or otherwise.)
Some - a very few - will give you a severance if they've really bent you over. But those tend to be small mom and pop types, not corporations which clean out your desk for you and lock you out of the building on a cold Monday morning.
Slashdot Mirror
A bit like Microsoft, yes. But MS would've been more like "Sell/give us your technology for next-to-nothing, or we'll buy someone else's inferior competing software, market the fuck out of it, and ruin you."
He's got one of those buttons already, except it's labeled "Fishy".
Nay, one page. If it's so large you can't fit the details on a single page, you need to pass another bill.
Each bill MUST be read before the house/senate before being brought to vote; reading occurs directly prior to the vote; anyone not present for the reading can not vote on the bill.
Damn, your Presidential Agenda is almost identical to mine (except for the July 4th one, which I'd not thought of). However, I've got a couple extra:
- Go back to the gold standard for currency (or at the very least, get rid of the Fed).
- Prohibit the government to go into debt except for, and in time of, war - via Amendment. In the event such a thing happens, there would be an immediate election.
- Return the selection of Representatives and Congressmen to the States: no direct elections. This will keep them more beholden to their "electorate" as they would be representing the state (and a significantly smaller body of State politicians they simply can't ignore, as they do the populace at large).
Actually, you might want to look at the timeline of Roman history again. Hint: the US went from "Republic" to "Empire" in 1861. The US has, in terms of 'great nations' had a very punctuated timeline. We're approaching the rough timeline equivalent of the Byzantine split: barbarians were at the gates, the bread and circuses did nothing to help, and Rome had greatly over-extended itself in military conquest (losing many of its later battles).
However, unlike Rome, I don't think the conquerors will be so happy to adopt our culture and ways of life. If anything, "ethnodiversity" will win out, I think.
Any polarization at this point is not going to end well, for anyone. We've got the government (at all levels, except a handful of states and smaller cities) clamping down on civil liberties, raising taxes, and increasing the size of the government. We've got politicians showing wanton disregard and contempt for their electorate at town hall meetings. And we've got people coming - armed with loaded rifles slung over their shoulders - to these town hall meetings (and nothing happening to them except for the media using them to spread lies about their skin color and political affiliations).
Ask yourself: if those "armed protesters" had shown up at the anti-illegal immigration rallies after those massive May Day pro-immigration rallies in DC and Phoenix several years ago, what would've happened? I guarantee you that the government wouldn't have minced words much, to put it gently. Now, things are too tense to even approach 'retribution'.
Ya know, we could spread it evenly if it wasn't for the "spending more in the last 8 months than what Bush and Co. spent in 8 years" problem.
The way I see it, it was either a political joke, or a real moon rock was given (remember, this was some time ago) and someone at the Dutch museum (say, the curator of the day) either sold it or kept it for himself. It's also possible that a couple astronauts had a little fun, too: just like things like, say, ammunition are commonplace and of no need for particular attention to a soldier, so might moon rocks be to the astronauts who took a couple shovelfuls of 'em on the moon. "Hey, Buzz, I found another golram moon rock in my dresser drawer this morning. Damn irritating. Hey, why don't we prank the Dutch?"
Of course, the only explanation left after that is that aliens wanted their terra luna back. :P
Thanks, I needed that. That was quite good.
I loathe the apparent devolution of language and despise the rampant misspellings, poor grammar, and horrific stream of consciousness run-ons I've witnessed on the boards and in gameplay.
Ehhrrhhhrhhhhhhh = sound of you taking a deep breath.
Go read Orwell's writings on language, please.
This move is horribly transparent.
The evident reason is so that, in the event of social dissent or uprising, they can cut off the communication of those dissenting. See: Iran just a month ago.
"Oh, it's been legal for years. Why would anyone care when they started to do it now if they didn't care when the law was passed?"
Surely, though, the Democrats will not abuse this. Surely. We have nothing to worry about.
You've got at least some coverage in the Dickinson area. A cursory look at maps shows they at least advertise -some- coverage there. Coverage maps show no coverage here.
My friend on ATT claims that he usually gets better coverage on his ranch near Ashby, NE and across that state than Verizon customers do. I believe him, because I don't think he'd be using the service otherwise.
Forget the iPhone. IMO, it was obsolete when it came out (feature for feature, half what Windows Mobile 6 is). Shoot, the iPhone doesn't even do multitasking and you could only recently change default sounds (I think). That's nuts. Linux (Maemo and Android, as well as others) and WinMo phones, Blackberry, and the like will be providing a great deal more functionality and become much more ubiquitous.
The center of that "no coverage" area? That's where I live - in the Black Hills of South Dakota. I can't even get AT&T to ignore me, it's so bad.
But I've got a friend who comes here on occasion; he's from here, see, so he's got a legitimate reason and everything! The thing is, he's got AT&T.
I live in a canyon and have Verizon. I do not get signal anywhere but on the third story of the house. He, on the other hand, gets it throughout the house - yes, GSM signal, as his phone(s) lack CDMA chipsets. This seems to be mostly true out here; if AT&T has no coverage, there is at least a carrier which will take your signal for GSM.
It's not about intelligence. Sure, that's a part of it - and intelligent people are often depressed as a result. But there's more to intelligence than that.
You can see all the gritty, shitty things about life and still be a happy, cheerful person. How? Shut it out. I'm not saying ignore it, I'm saying shut it out from your emotional 'center' and be your own person. I guess this might be considered "wisdom", if such a thing is still considered present in the minds of man.
It seems to me that entirely too many geeky types think because they're depressed, they are intelligent. They see things others don't - or things they think others don't - so therefore they're smarter. Do they even consider that others who may be more intelligent than they are shut such things out and chose to not dwell on what serves no purpose in dwelling?
Nevermind that the majority of Americans were born here (and this has been true for every generation), let me address the "immigrant" part itself:
Very few of them came here illegally, and even when they came in amassed numbers, they still integrated.
Agreed: Nintendo really needs to drop the Wii price, probably in tiers up through Christmas. It's been the same price since the Christmas before last Christmas, which is kinda nuts considering (as the other guy said) there've been no 'killer apps' for a while.
Regardless of whether they targeted the Wii at kids or not, there is only so much that can be done with cinematic-brandings using LEGO concepts. They haven't even bothered to release (and improve upon) that many Nintendo classics, for that matter. If they'd have done that, I'd have bought one a while ago.
You're correct, but you've already taken care of the difficult part: you've gotten the correct kids into the correct required courses with at least 70% of the task completed. The last class of the day is, typically, band, choir, art, or some other "non required" class in high school, to the best of my experience. That kind of thing - as well as sorting 10% of the kids around to the appropriate classes so they can take their necessary classes.
In the meantime, the majority of the kids are taking classes they need to take to finish high school. Chances it will be mostly right, as modern school programs have seen to any cultural statistic outliers: the stupid ones go to special class, as do the smart ones, so there's no need to schedule for AP or much.
Uh yeah, classes like that have been around for a while.
Your "WTF moment" should've been brought to you by the "interested in fashion design" statement, not the fact that there were piano (music) and sewing (home economics) courses.
Teachers may be some of the least-paid workers out there, but they've got a third of the year to do whatever they want. They're likely making significantly more than the average mid-level IT worker, per hour; moreso for the ones who are tenured and are about to retire.
Spend the school year (while their own kids are in school) teaching classes and have the summer off with them to do what you want, and make a couple dozen thou in the process. Are you kidding me? Fuck yeah, that's a great deal.
Hmm, maybe they could find somewhere to trim their budgets, then? Surely they don't need 1 computer per every other child (and have only a fraction of the computers available for use at any one time), many rooms unused throughout the day due to scheduling, and half their budgets focused on sports every year?
My wife was "not allowed" to graduate high school early, even though she had (or would have had, if they'd let her take a full course load) the requisite credits and courses. They made one of her required classes "full" so she had to wait to take it, just so they could count another student, and thus pick up the $2500 for her "attendance" for another semester. This, in part, so the high school Super could drive around in a Lexus.
Dude, seriously. I feel your pain - as one of those kids who jumped from school to school because they were too dumb and I was bored. My parents were quite worried that I had not really started reading (I could read, just didn't) until 3rd grade.
I was in a total of 9 school districts (3 private schools inclusive) throughout K-12 - and I was homeschooled for the majority of middle school years (6th through 9th grades). This isn't in one region, it's in half a dozen different towns in 3 different states 500+ miles from each other.
Take the kid out of school and "home school" him. If you have to, give him books and lock him in a room and tell him to "entertain himself". He will still learn more, because his mind will be engaged (if, for no other reason, because he's got nothing else to do).
If you have to, ferret him into work in a 4U server box and stick him in the corner - then ask him what he learned "at school" on the car trip home. Chances are, he'll learn more in a day which will stick with him than he does in a whole week of school.
I say those things somewhat tongue in cheek, but seriously: there are very few good schools out there, regardless of money or location, public or private. If your kids are even moderately intelligent/above average (as I am - not uber-intelligent but certainly brighter than average, no small part due to my upbringing) they will be bored and unchallenged.
Like you, my children will not see the inside of a public school building (and, most likely, not the inside of a private one, either). I will "shoot it out" with CPS/whatever agents before they're sent away like that. I love them too much.
My son is currently 5; due to new early-start laws, we've got to register him for school already. They (the federal government) is trying to take our kids from us at an earlier and earlier age. I went to kindergarten in NY at the age of 7; I was a year oler than most of my classmates due to when my birthday fell in the year, but at the same time, it was required at 6. Now it's 5. When my mom was a kid (at the same kindergarten), kindergarten was not even required.
As far as education of children at home: as I said, my son is 5. I have made no 'concerted' effort in teaching him anything except what he is interested in. If he asks a question, I guide him in finding the answer for himself or I answer it. He knows the alphabet, can almost count (and write) to 20 (and after you're past the "teens", it's easy-peezy), and knows more about the natural world than most high schoolers. He plays with legos, draw, and plays with his sister for most of the day.
Most importantly, though: he is using his brain, and he is not behind his peers by any stretch of the imagination. He is interacting with adults (I work from home, as does my wife) on a daily basis, is learning proper adult etiquette, and is one step closer (than he was and than others his age) to becoming half of what childhood is about: an adult.
The other half is about playing and having fun. And even that "fun" stuff has lessons for adulthood: skinning your knee, falling from a tree, or getting sprayed by a skunk all have life lessons you are likely to not forget.
(Sorry for the rambling nature; Friday started a day early for me this week.)
Sir, I congratulate you for your insight into this matter, being as you are neither an American or a "conservative". Very few people realize today - even, or maybe especially, Americans - that the US Federal government is more synonymous with Brussels than it is with, say, London or Berlin.
The US was formed with (at the time, 13) sovereign states in the vein of the states of ancient Greece: autonomous in government, civics, and citizenry. But unlike Greece of yore, it was formed with a national government and a constitution with an attempt to retain unity amongst the states - both politically and culturally. They did not want to see the destructive in-fighting that the Greeks experienced, despite their common "Greekness".
Unfortunately, that all kind of snowballed here in the United States 150 years ago when we had that little Federalists vs. Secessionists conflict. That, as well as subsequent and repeated Federal malfeasance, has resulted in a great deal of mistrust in said Federal government. The comparison to Brussels is true to a large degree for many Americans.
Fire departments: except for 'disaster' stimuluses since 9/11, they are entirely funded at the local (or state) level.
Police departments: likewise, except for post-9/11 and similar funding; again, it makes up a minor part of their operational budgets.
Libraries: almost entirely funded at the local level.
Federal ('public') schools: at least half the funding of the majority of schools comes from local tax payers; the state likewise puts a substantial amount towards schools. Before No Child Left Behind (and similar initiatives), the federal monies were less than 1/3 total funding.
If the federal government ceased to exist tomorrow, most municipality and civil services would continue to exist just fine. In fact, many would be better off, as there'd be less paperwork to cut through to actually meet your mandates of "protect and serve", "educate and inform" and the like.
Yes, the school district paid for the program. They paid a shitton for what should be a very simple program: manage schedules, 'notes' on discipline, and grades (which are directly related to the schedules for under 10k students. This should be, what, 4 database tables?
They are, essentially, paying over $512 per student for this software. (Hopefully this is not a reoccurring cost and comes with at least several years of free upgrades - so that, you know, it'll work). That's a crazy amount of money for any record-keeping software, and there is no possible way such a cost could be justified by a private institution. But instead of real, actual oversight, the public school system gets gobs of money per student.
Chances are, the school system will hide this colossal loss and dig the 20-year-old terminals and terminal servers from the janitorial closet, pretending they never made the purchase. They'll just go back to doing what they did for the past 20 years: claiming budgeting deficits, charging students for minor damage to books, and giving the school's sports programs millions each year.
I went to a very nice private school where the per-student annual operational cost was a fraction (about 1/3, after including federal, state, and local monies) of what the local school spent on each student per semester. The private school's computer labs were roughly as good as the local public school's labs (though nowhere near as excessive); the private school built an $8 million new building the year after I left (after the old building got washed away in a flood the year prior), classes were smaller, and the private school had higher GPAs/better standardized test scores. Part of that last bit is due to the whole "affluence" thing, but the rest can't be looked at in such a fashion: the public schools waste money on stupid, trivial things which have nothing to do with education.
Government schools throw money down the drain for trivial, useless, and untested things simply because they can. (The public school district put in half a dozen labs my freshman year; there was roughly one computer for every 4 students, and no more than one was ever open at any one time.)
As for government healthcare... you can bet that it'll be run to a large degree by the federal government - probably much in the same fashion as the Veteran Hospitals are (ie poorly). The rest will be outsourced to (wait for it) the private sector. This is just like every other government function: the private sector does the actual work while a massive government "oversight" committee/organization reviews everything for compliance (resulting in a much, much higher cost to the government due to private sector contracting).
There's a reason why government has traditionally moved slower than the need requires (and moreso the larger the government): they make a lot of goddamn paperwork, and it takes time to shuffle it. Yes, that's simplified, but it's also not far off the mark.
Just to play devil's advocate: why do you owe them even 2-weeks notice? I'm fairly certain most employers will never say "hey, we're looking to replace you/cut your position back. We'll keep you on for two more weeks, but you'll have to leave after that".
Companies have been doing the drop-them-like-its-hot thing for decades, to little repercussion. Meanwhile - and unlike a company, which is able to distribute its costs and performance across multiple employees - you are up shit creek: best case scenario, you've got one other person (a spouse or dedicated friend/girlfriend) helping with your cost of living. If you lose your job, you're fucked: you're dipping into savings and collecting unemployment (for a limited time only). Just hope you don't get cut lose shortly after being hired out of college and/or a career change, or you'll have neither the unemployment or (likely) much of a savings to fall back on.
In short, the penalty to a company for your instant-quit is marginal compared to the hardship they put an employee through with a termination. It's not even reasonably comparable, and morally speaking, much more reasonable to accept the customer bailing w/o the two weeks than the company bailing w/o any notice.
(However, it is most certainly a moral imperative to give those 2-weeks notice if you said you would, whether in writing or otherwise.)
Some - a very few - will give you a severance if they've really bent you over. But those tend to be small mom and pop types, not corporations which clean out your desk for you and lock you out of the building on a cold Monday morning.