bamacre
Lifer
- Jul 1, 2004
- 21,029
- 2
- 81
There's already an incentive for finishing high school. It's called "being able to get a job." If that incentive is not enough for someone, then no incentive will be enough.
One thing we could do, is get rid of the incentives FOR dropping out of high school. Make dealing drugs on the street a thing of the past by legalizing, at least, marijuana. And like you said, no welfare for HS drop-outs.
I am 100% ok with giving up the freedom of leading a life of laziness and stupidity by dropping out of high school. Not all freedoms are good freedoms.
Oh and bamacre.....don't bother. You are not changing my mind.
Oh and bamacre.....don't bother. You are not changing my mind.
why waste money on those who don't want to be educated... when millions are struggling for money to further their education?
bamacre
Lifer
- Jul 1, 2004
- 21,029
- 2
- 81
You completely ignore a long list of people who have led successful lives after dropping out of high school, or never even attended.
What good does it do to force adults to be in school when they don't want to be there? You can't force someone to learn. And keeping them them there definitely has the potential to disrupt the learning process of others who want to take advantage.
It is not the government?s responsibility it is the parent?s responsibility to see their kid get an education. We just have too many parents that had no business ever becoming parents that are exponentially creating off spring whom become parents and whom also have no business in doing so.
It is a never ending ever escalating cycle I am afraid and it is creating poor at a rate that is starting to exceed what the rich can be made to support via taxation.
They are not adults. They are teenagers which is why the laws exist. Their priorities tend to be different as do their logical processes of deduction than that of a more experienced adult. There is a good reason why we have laws which only apply to those who are not legally considered adults yet and it all revolves on their ability to make the best choices for themselves while keeping in mind that those choices also effect the lives of others beyond their control.
Also, there are other solutions already in place meant for those who disrupt the learning process. If those solutions are not effective enough then the real answer is cracking down more on enforcement even if that means booting out more of those who cause too many disruptions through expulsion.
When it comes to the successful who dropped out, I am sure that the vast majority of them would have remained just as successful if they stayed in HS those remaining 2 years. Little to no loss there.
The problem is concluding which students are truly a waste of money as opposed to those who still get something out of their education even if they don't want it. No one has a crystal ball that tells them whether or not a certain student will turn over a new leaf. No one has a way to figure out if a certain student will take with them more than what they would have received had they dropped out on their own.
The lack of education in these kids effects our lives negatively far more than the amount of tax dollars that are spent and ultimately wasted. You also need to understand how that money works. Yes, a school gets X amount of dollars for a particular student but those dollars are hardly ever spent just on that student. Almost the entire school benefits which means those kids who are deemed a waste of space are contributing towards the funding of the successful. Trust me. I work in the school district. I know how it operates in that sense.
Part of the governments job is to preserve and protect the common welfare of all of its people. It cannot do that successfully unless the people are properly educated.
I agree that it can only do so much in terms of education and a whole lot of the responsibility falls into the hands of the parents as it should, but government does have a place here too. It is not solely up to the parents. A lot of parents don't give a shit if their kid goes to school and a lot of the kids are too young to understand how important it really is. By being forced to go by law, many of these kinds of students learn about the importance of school in ways that they never would have learned if their parents were given all of the power.
Maybe there should be TAX deduction for graduating from High School???
I work at a community college and most of the standards for a High School Education fall way short of the requirements to enter a college or university or even a community college. 1 year of general math is barely enough to be able to count your change. Most all colleges require Geometry (with a grade of C or higher) as a minimum. Nursing has a fairly low math requirement but is strong on Biology, Chemistry, Physiology, etc.
I work at a community college and most of the standards for a High School Education fall way short of the requirements to enter a college or university or even a community college. 1 year of general math is barely enough to be able to count your change. Most all colleges require Geometry (with a grade of C or higher) as a minimum. Nursing has a fairly low math requirement but is strong on Biology, Chemistry, Physiology, etc.
Those who was forced to learn, never learn as well as those who wanted to learn themselves.
its one thing to reserve money for those drop outs to come back to school... but to force them to learn just isn't a effecient use of limited funds we have.
bamacre
Lifer
- Jul 1, 2004
- 21,029
- 2
- 81
Perhaps I should have been more clear. When I said "adults," I mean those who are 18+ years of age. So we may be in more agreement than it appears. Unless you support forcing those 18 or older to stay in high school.
Regardless, it is worth mentioning that one of those on the list is Danny Thomas, who founded St. Jude Children's Research Hospital.
The 18 thing is tricky, but only because the average student that stays reasonably on track will hit 18 when they are a senior in HS or a junior if they are held back one year at some point. Otherwise, I am ok with allowing them to drop out. Maybe a reasonable compromise would be one which required a minimum of 2 years of being held back and also being 18+ before being allowed to drop out.
Forcing people to learn and forcing them to stay in school are two very different things with a different set of goals. Some of those goals are the same but many are different too. Think about it for a while before you respond. If it worked in the sense that a lot more money could actually be dedicated towards the "good" students if what you wanted happened then you might have a point but trust me...it doesn't work that way and nor can it. The school system is far too large and complex to treat each student like that much of an individual in regards to the details of how the budget actually works.
I do see your point, and I agree with you to a certain degree. However, with california cutting out thousands of teachers in the coming month, classes will already be crowded, why add more students to it to further degrade teaching quality?
From economics point of view, we should hire as many teachers as possible, because its a great infrastruture investment for our future. At the same time, unless we really have a surplus of teachers, we should keep classes as small as possible to promote interactive learning.
Instead of an incentive to do well, there should be a penalty for doing poorly. Why don't we TAX people who don't graduate? penalize them. You can apply this to poor people too. Tax poor people at a high rate, and eliminate the tax when they get above poverty level. What more incentive is there than a penalty?
Somehow taxing poor people will help them get a higher paying job, which of course might require training or a move....
Sometimes I think I have heard the limits of human depravity and hatred, but then I get surprised by a post like this. Did a poor person make you feel bad, or steal your girl or something?
Why bother living in a country with a progressive tax system then? If you don't like America, and a tax system it has had for decades, move out.
Are you really that ignorant that you only can apply relativity to one concept but not another?
I guarantee that if your life were analyzed that it could be said that you are "stealing" in one fashion or another.
It is great to see that the concept of personal responsibility is giving way to the nanny state. If someone does not want to finish high school - so be it. We all have to make decisions that impact our lives both positively and negatively. In the past, these decisions helped to define who we become. Now, unfortunately, porr decisions are being rewarded at the expense of those that made good decisions.
I love the fact that my college degree allows me to get better jobs than those that did not bother. I do not love the fact that this increase in earnings makes me somehow beholden to those that did not bother to waste their time in college or highschool.
If you drop out, you deal with the consequences. I am sick of the government trying to make me feel bad about it.
I love the fact that my college degree allows me to get better jobs than those that did not bother. I do not love the fact that this increase in earnings makes me somehow beholden to those that did not bother to waste their time in college or highschool.
If you drop out, you deal with the consequences. I am sick of the government trying to make me feel bad about it.
The fact is you are negatively affected by high school drop outs. Just as the government mandates vaccines and drivers licenses for the greater good, the same can be argued for high school diplomas.
Or why not let kids drop out at age 6 if they want? Why the arbitrary age of 16?
I know some people that dropped out that went on and got better paying job than a majority of those who graduated. It isn't as cut and dry as you would like to think. The level of education that is required to graduate high school doesn't necessarily prepare you for anything useful.
My main point is that not allowing people to drop out alone will likely do almost nothing to fix the problems.
cKGunslinger
Lifer
- Nov 29, 1999
- 16,408
- 57
- 91
That's a poor argument. How about this:
No drinking alcohol until age 45.
No smoking cigarettes until age 60.
No driving until 32.
Everyone must finish up post-doctorate work and earn a PhD/MD.
All these things would technically reduce us being "negatively affected" by slackers.
Any age you pick is going to be somewhat "arbitrary." For many people, 16 is typically old enough to have a firm grasp on whether this whole "education" thing is going to be beneficial. And not every high school drop-out instantly becomes a drug dealer, gang member, prisoner, low life. Many go into thier family business, or some other field that doesn't require Literature IV and Trignometry.
I never said it was good. But, those that are responsible should not be stuck holding the bag for those that are not. This sadly, is not the case - and there are more examples every day where the doers are being held hostage by the do nots.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter