my views on how the american goverment traps lower class citizens.

[Coodles]

let me just say this is a long long paper i just wrote out of no where. its coming from a 15 year old hippies mind who sees the worst effects first hand. if you take the time to read this id greatly thank you =]

i dont understand why school is so god damn important.
I mean if someone is just smart. not to brag theres alot of people out there that can do this, but i can take a computer apart and put it back together even better. Its very simple. Its also a job that gets a VERY high salary BUT!!! you have to get a degree. ok now.. someone explain to me why. if i know how to do something.... why must i go through WASTED HOURS of my life. in school. let alone COLLEDGE. Where you have to PAY them, to go to school. i dont like school in the first place. School Fees are pushing it. but my friend just told me the other day, "colledge cost about 23,000 something dollars that iam loaning from the school but i have to pay back after i get a degree/job." so im like... umm...if the school has money...why do they need to give it to you to buy stuff...cant they just... loan the **** to you? i mean pay for it if it gets damaged or something sure.. but they loan you money they already have. so you can go buy things for a school you choose to enter. and they exepect you to pay back these outrageous prices. JUST so i can do something i know how to do right now. i could turn my comp off that im using right now. Disassemble it. and reassemble it. just perfect. but before i can turn that into a job i have to go to school for 7 more years. im a sophmore. id still have to finish this year at highschool.[well technically im a freshman i didnt excel last year.. XD].

Im sorry i think school should be a choice. after your sophmore year i think you should be able to choose if you want to go to school anymore or not.i from my own life experiences know things would be easier. ok i have no father my moms working one job with barely any pay. and what am i doing? im supposed to be doing school work while im ****ing starving because we dont got enough money, why dont we have enough money my moms single i dont expect her to support me and hers eating smoking and bills. so i would go get a job at like arbys or something. BUT!! you have to have a workers permit if your under 18. well to get a workers permit YOU HAVE TO HAVE GOOD GRADES. now if your DP&L was turned off because your poor and its 90 degrees outside. and even hotter inside. do you really think i can study like that?

now lets see. 2 people in a house that cost 500 some dollars a month. both smoke about 2 packs of ciggerettes a day that comes up to about 15 or so dollars bills all together come too about maybe 2000 or more. when you only bring home 3000 a month or less.. thats kinda hard to make it on.

eating ramen noodles for monthes, going to food pantries regularly.

our goverment FORCES kids to basically either learn what they MAKE us learn.

OR

Suffer.

oh theres medicare and blue cross and welfare and social security the goverment helps out...

bull****.

the goverment knows our problems. yet they still wont realize that **** we are the leading country in the world we dont gotta try and show off our schools.

i mean seriously was a school attacked on 9/11?

no.

but maybe theres a highschool student who might have known how to make the twin towers strong enough to withstand those attacks.

but oh ****.

hes only a junior.....

hes still got 6 years to go before he could do anything!

WTF i say if you have a skill ****ing use it.

now that wasnt real i dont know someone who could have developed a way to make the twin towers strong enough to withstand attacks.

but who ****ing knows maybe someone does!

but because we are forced to either take life in stride over many many many years. or suffer because we didnt learn in school.

becuase the goverment doesnt care about drops outs cant get this or cant get that because im a drop out or something. its bull****.

THEY ARE PEOPLE TOO.

they have more important things on their mind than education!

im sorry when im at home hungry as **** because i havent ate for a few days its not easy to find the hypotneuse of a right triangle.

and im not blaming my mother. i love my mom she took care of me by her self for 15 years. and im wanting to do the same thing right now as her! drop out and find a ****ing job. but oh.. im in my sophmore year and im a freshman by standards.

you people know what standards are?

bull****.

set by some ****ing scientist who says well most sucessfull people need this grade by this time.

dude.. im sorry if im not as fast of a learner as you. i dont ****ing care. i dont need to learn right now. i need to eat. i need some electricity. i need some air conditioning.

So therefore. my point is the Goverment has trapped lower-class citizens of america in poverty. unless my mom hits the ****ing lottery[which is payed over time in intervals not one large cash sum btw] the only other person who lives in this house is me. and i cant get a job because my grades are low. why are my grades low im stressed and im depressed becasue i have to get yelled at by my mom because we dont have money and that makes her stressed. why does that make her stressed? because if we dont have money they will take our BASIC LIVING NEEDS FROM US. does that sound like a honerable country to you? if you **** up your going to starve and want to die in poverty because you got a ****ING F on your test.

ok so im ranting yet again.

basic point.

america is not so honerable.

our goverment needs to find the fundemental flaws, and actually do something about them.

there are people living out on the streets. and it may not even be their fault.

i know its not my fault im hungry sometimes and we have nothing to eat.

i know its not my fault sometimes we dont have heat or a/c

and people i dont want your pity. i get through ****. its nothing ****ing new.

i just want people to understand.

our goverment no matter how flashy they look they dont give 2 flyin ****S about the lower class. they worry about how they can make more money.

well so do we. our goverment, they just wont let me.

if you took the time to read all my ranting and nonsense i thank you. i hope it opened a door to a place you havent thought about before. because everything in this artical is real the problems i face, expenses, everything.

this is my real problem in life right now.

im 15, a slacker by school terms

but give me a computer and ill upgrade it,

give me a few intellectual beings ill talk psychology with them.

smartness isnt all in the schools its in the people.

maybe one day america might realize that.

<X3

[Coodles]

btw i know this has alot of profanity in it.

im sorry if that offends anyone but i use that in my writing.

[KA0Z R4VR]

Don't double post please. Use the edit button.

I mean if someone is just smart. not to brag theres alot of people out there that can do this, but i can take a computer apart and put it back together even better. Its very simple. Its also a job that gets a VERY high salary BUT!!! you have to get a degree.

No one is "just smart". Taking apart a computer and putting pieces together is not something that you can define as smart. If you can remember where everything goes then thats all there is to it. Now, if you were to give details about the specific part and it's function, then it takes a bit more brains.

why must i go through WASTED HOURS of my life. in school. let alone COLLEDGE.

Obviously, spending time at college would help with the spelling issue. You take courses in college; It is up to you to take which ones you want to accel in. If you consider it a waste of time, then don't bother.

School Fees are pushing it. but my friend just told me the other day, "colledge cost about 23,000 something dollars that iam loaning from the school but i have to pay back after i get a degree/job." so im like... umm...if the school has money...why do they need to give it to you to buy stuff...cant they just... loan the **** to you? i mean pay for it if it gets damaged or something sure.. but they loan you money they already have. so you can go buy things for a school you choose to enter.

It's a little something called *interest. I see where you are comming from, but you are not understanding the principal of loans and above all else, college. Most loans are built on interest rates. They gradually charge you a fixed or fluctuating percentage in which it is applied to your initial loan. It is how they make money. Secondly, college is not high school. You are paying to take the course. It is not up to them to make you go. They are not going to just give the materials needed because they do not care if you need it or not.

...and they exepect you to pay back these outrageous prices.

My point exactly - Interest is how they make money.

i could turn my comp off that im using right now. Disassemble it. and reassemble it. just perfect.

Once again, this does not mean you are smart. Plenty of people can take apart something and put it back together. It does not define how smart you are.

Im sorry i think school should be a choice. after your sophmore year i think you should be able to choose if you want to go to school anymore or not.i from my own life experiences know things would be easier. ok i have no father my moms working one job with barely any pay.

This hardly has critical thinking involved, but as far as my knowledge goes, graduates tend to make anywhere from $29,000+ a year, while non-graduates make around $20,000 and less. If you don't go to school, then you will be in the same situation your mom is in. Working hard now with no education is NOT going to pay off later. You will end up in the same situation - A non-graduate making just enough to live an at-line poverty life-style. Is that what you want?

you have to have a workers permit if your under 18. well to get a workers permit YOU HAVE TO HAVE GOOD GRADES. now if your DP&L was turned off because your poor and its 90 degrees outside. and even hotter inside. do you really think i can study like that?

This is slowly becomming a rant of situations and poor excuses and it really does not belong in this forum.

im sorry when im at home hungry as **** because i havent ate for a few days its not easy to find the hypotneuse of a right triangle.

LOL. I am sorry, but the way I read that was funny. No offense intended.

and im not blaming my mother. i love my mom she took care of me by her self for 15 years. and im wanting to do the same thing right now as her! drop out and find a ****ing job. but oh.. im in my sophmore year and im a freshman by standards.

This is exactly what I mean. You will be in her exact situation. School is a fundamental part of anyones' life. It is there to teach critical thinking and rational forms of logic that can be used in the real world towards a field of study that generally appeals to you.

So therefore. my point is the Goverment has trapped lower-class citizens of america in poverty.

Lower class citizens did that, not the government. They give people the tools and mandate that each indivisual must comply with the tools given. Those standards are only indicators that one is applying themself towards a goal. They somewhat prepare your life for bigger goals and set your determination. If you can not simply get a hard earned GPA, then they do not expect you to acheive some higher end goal in your career.

unless my mom hits the ****ing lottery[which is payed over time in intervals not one large cash sum btw]

Actually, it can be given either or. Lump sum with taxes, or over a period time. It's which ever suites you best.

the only other person who lives in this house is me. and i cant get a job because my grades are low. why are my grades low im stressed and im depressed becasue i have to get yelled at by my mom because we dont have money and that makes her stressed.

Yet again, this situation could have been solved a long time ago. If your mom had gone to college in which she paid for, she would have probably found a job or the school would assist her in a career search and she could have been making more money. If you do not follow up in school expect the same.

our goverment needs to find the fundemental flaws, and actually do something about them.

The only flaw is *you* as a person not taking the responsibility that *you* should take to ensure a nice lifestyle. They provide the tools; USE THEM.

there are people living out on the streets. and it may not even be their fault.

Actually, they were given each chance everyone else was.

our goverment no matter how flashy they look they dont give 2 flyin ****S about the lower class. they worry about how they can make more money.

We live in a democracy. We the people, run the government. It was made like that for a reason. the president does not make $1,000,000,000,000 a day because he charges people. It costs money to run schools and programs. It is said that each student has a $20,000 investment from our government paid out in education and tools that other countries wish they had. You say you are poor, but in reality you have a fat $20,000 check in the mail, IF you finish through your education and apply what you learned from school.

if you took the time to read all my ranting and nonsense i thank you. i hope it opened a door to a place you havent thought about before. because everything in this artical is real the problems i face, expenses, everything.

This whole thread should not even exist. There is nothing to debate against; All this is is just a big opinion which is built so horribly on the idea of making money and living happy at the moment with no regards to what our government has put on the table for you to use.

smartness isnt all in the schools its in the people.

Ignorance isn't all in the schools, but it is in some people.

[Kilroy_x]

Originally Posted by KA0Z R4VR

No one is "just smart". Taking apart a computer and putting pieces together is not something that you can define as smart. If you can remember where everything goes then thats all there is to it. Now, if you were to give details about the specific part and it's function, then it takes a bit more brains.

Some people are definitely "Just smart". Intelligence is for the most part an abstract construct anyways, but there are certainly child chess prodigies or mathematical savants who show profound skill in an area well before they ever formal training in it. The same is true of all variety of skills.

This hardly has critical thinking involved, but as far as my knowledge goes, graduates tend to make anywhere from $29,000+ a year, while non-graduates make around $20,000 and less. If you don't go to school, then you will be in the same situation your mom is in. Working hard now with no education is NOT going to pay off later. You will end up in the same situation - A non-graduate making just enough to live an at-line poverty life-style. Is that what you want?

Pay varies dramatically from job to job even for the uneducated. A commission laborer can often make a very good salary. Not withstanding the fact that uneducated males specifically tend to be in the upper ranges of such salaries.

This is slowly becomming a rant of situations and poor excuses and it really does not belong in this forum.

That's what it was to begin with. However there is quite a lot to discuss in the post, so I'm not sure what the issue is. What you are responding to is actually an example given by the OP of how government economic interference creates a catch-22 situation of sorts which dramatically hurts people.

Lower class citizens did that, not the government.

BS

They give people the tools and mandate that each indivisual must comply with the tools given. Those standards are only indicators that one is applying themself towards a goal. They somewhat prepare your life for bigger goals and set your determination. If you can not simply get a hard earned GPA, then they do not expect you to acheive some higher end goal in your career.

This is one of the most absurd statements I've ever heard. What goal are you even talking about, the goal of impressing a gaggle of idiot high school teachers whose positions are roughly equivalent to sinecures? If I want to learn about, for example, the philosophy of science, I can go to a library and pick up books by Thomas Kuhn and Karl Popper. I can then read them, and given that I understand them I will probably give every indication that I understood them when I get in conversation with other knowledgeable individuals about the subject.

School is self-improvement, you say? So are a million other things.

Yet again, this situation could have been solved a long time ago. If your mom had gone to college in which she paid for, she would have probably found a job or the school would assist her in a career search and she could have been making more money. If you do not follow up in school expect the same.

Blaming a person for the actions of their parents is one of the most appalling things a person can do. It would be one thing if you weren't claiming he was at fault for failing to meet the standards of an oppressive, illegitimate system, but not only are you claiming we can dismiss his plight because his mom didn't act a certain way 20 years ago, you're also saying "tough sh1t" to an entire range of legitimate complaints.

The only flaw is *you* as a person not taking the responsibility that *you* should take to ensure a nice lifestyle. They provide the tools; USE THEM.

No, the government is flawed as well, almost simply by merit of its nature. I would agree that a person should try to make the best of their situation, but that doesn't mean the situation should be condoned.

Actually, they were given each chance everyone else was.

Chance, maybe. Resources or treatment? Maybe not.

We live in a democracy.

Actually it's closer to a constitutional republic, although the whole constitutional part is going away rather quickly.

We the people, run the government.

To an extremely limited extent, perhaps.

It costs money to run schools and programs. It is said that each student has a $20,000 investment from our government paid out in education and tools that other countries wish they had. You say you are poor, but in reality you have a fat $20,000 check in the mail, IF you finish through your education and apply what you learned from school.

What are you talking about, a $20,000 annual average salary for High School graduates? The amount of money spent per student on public education? In either of these instances what you are saying is nonsensical.

This whole thread should not even exist. There is nothing to debate against; All this is is just a big opinion which is built so horribly on the idea of making money and living happy at the moment with no regards to what our government has put on the table for you to use.

There is a wealth of things to debate about. For instance, if a person wants to make money and live happily at the moment, why shouldn't they be allowed to? Why is the basic opportunity structure of this country so reliant of Government, and is this detrimental to individuals? Does the government even have a right to put things on the table for us, and can it do so effectively?

These are all core questions which largely seem to be asked by the OP himself. Answer them.

Ignorance isn't all in the schools, but it is in some people.

It's in all people to a greater or lesser extent, ignorance is just the lack of knowledge and no one is omniscient. You seem incredibly ignorant about economics, for example.

[Coodles]

Originally Posted by KA0Z R4VR

The only flaw is *you* as a person not taking the responsibility that *you* should take to ensure a nice lifestyle. They provide the tools; USE THEM.

Ahh so the flaw is me?

they can provide all they want, thats fine but understand with unbearable conditions it has lead to depression, loss of sleep,lots of things thats arent "healthy"

maybe i might be more enticed to "take responisbility" when im met with some reasonable living conditions.

i know im not the only one out there that has suffered, and it pains me to see that people dont understand what iam saying here.

what im trying to get acrossed to people[wether it works or not] is that you may be sitting in your room studying having something nice to drink.

well.

try studying when your house smells rancid because your food has gone bad because we couldnt get enough money for electric.

try waking up in 90 degree or more weather with no air conditioner not even a fan.

you may say this isnt anything its not what in your mind is considered critical thinking.

well next time a human life suffering and being malnourished isnt something worth critical thinking, then i might see your view.

[devonin]

So what exactly is your point here? The entire OP seems to be you bitching about the fact that you have to get a degree in order to have a job that requires you to have a degree.

Or more to the point, you seem to be claiming that you already possess -all- the skills and knowledge necessary to acquire a degree in something like Hardware Systems Management, and thus think going to school is a waste of your time.

One of the largest misunderstandings about the education system among people who don't like it, is that the sole purpose of the education system is to give you the individual knowledge of subject matter. History is to teach you about historical events only. Biology is to teach you about the workings of the living world only. To someone like you who thinks they have some highly marketable skillset (I think you highly overestimate that by the way) you view the "forced" acquisition of this wasted knowledge as a waste of your time.

The problem is that these courses aren't just designed to impart the specific knoweldge of the subject matter, they are also designed to train you in various skills that are important, but have nothing to do with the subject directly. I'm a historian. Almost -no- job I get with my degree will care one bit for my factual knowledge of British History, it cares about the skills I learned, developed and honed while getting the degree.

The secondary (Or primary depending on your view) purpose of the education system is to develop skills. The skill to think critically, the skill to communicate effectively, the skill to conduct research, to prove a thesis.

If you applied to this "high-paying" job you are positive you can get because you can take a computer apart and put it back together (As an aside, I can do that as well, and if I applied for a job in IT, I would be laughed at) with the quality of writing and communication you've demonstrated in this post, it woudln't matter if you -did- have the degree, you still wouldn't get hired.

Your overuse of profanity, your spelling and grammatical errors, the terrible flow of your ideas, your inability to communicate in an effective manner, all of these are failings that the education system is designed to educate you out of.

Education -is- a choice, it is perfectly optional. You don't have to go if you don't want to. Your problem is you want to have your cake and eat it too. You can't say "Waah, school is stupid, I don't want to do it, but I -do- want a very high paying job in a technical field starting right up there." There are many jobs that are perfectly attainable without a college degree that after enough time and additional training make rather a lot of money.

A Manager at McDonalds makes more money per year than a new teacher does, and teachers had to go through generally 6 years more education at their own expense to get that job.

While your issues with social programs, and your apparant view that the government is somehow deliberately seeking to keep impoverished people living below the poverty line are potentially worth a seperate discussion, the overarching thrust of your OP makes me suggest to you that you simply don't get what the education system is trying to do for you, and from that stems your dissatisfaction.

[KilikOdagawa]

I can understand what you're saying. I'm in the same grade as you are. *But someone that stands out a little more in the higher ranks.* Since I don't know how to do the whole splitting of a quote, I'll just say this. I've never studied once in my life. I'm basically a straight A student with a lack of motivation. Intelligence may not be specifically someone's fault, BUT it is partially in the way a brain works.

It's situations like the OP that make me happy to be in the situation I am. I fell you dude. My dad is having to raise my brother and I on low income. *As it stands less than 800 a week* We still seem to get by. Ramen is a popular dish here because it is cheap and is filling.

I can also relate to you on this, why are we being bludgeoned with all of this unimportant information that we will probably never use in the profession of our choice? I mean look at the Japs. All their life they have to follow one profession. That is what they go to school for. That is why they are so good at what they do. That is why they have 2nd best economy IN THE WORLD. We have the first because we have good relations in the government. So it seems to me that no one here can relate to you (that has posted so far), therefore are unable to truly understand your situation. Which may not be your mother's fault. It might have happened a long time ago. It's hard to get a good education on a good income. But you have to try. That's all you can do. I know it'll be hard but you can still get good grades and receive that worker's permit you've been wanting.

Low class families are entrapped. No matter how anyone argues it, only those who are currently caught in that web know the truth. I want someone to prove me wrong.

[devonin]

I've lived with my mother and sister in a one bedroom apartment, sleeping on the couch, living off a welfare check, eating Macaroni and Cheese instead of ramen. So your objection that I can't relate to being a low-income family fails right there, would you care to object on different grounds?

[Kilroy_x]

Originally Posted by devonin

Education -is- a choice, it is perfectly optional. You don't have to go if you don't want to.

He doesn't fluidly distinguish between k-12 and university education, your statement is selectively true based on which is in question.

While your issues with social programs, and your apparant view that the government is somehow deliberately seeking to keep impoverished people living below the poverty line are potentially worth a seperate discussion, the overarching thrust of your OP makes me suggest to you that you simply don't get what the education system is trying to do for you, and from that stems your dissatisfaction.

It seemed to me he was simply saying that actions on the part of the Government -do- keep poor people poor, not necessarily that it was intentional.

[Kilroy_x]

Originally Posted by KilikOdagawa

We have the first because we have good relations in the government.

...what?

[devonin]

He doesn't fluidly distinguish between k-12 and university education, your statement is selectively true based on which is in question.

He's talking about being able to get a job in IT, to me that sounds precisely like he's speaking about the college/university education.

[KA0Z R4VR]

Originally Posted by Kilroy_x

Some people are definitely "Just smart". Intelligence is for the most part an abstract construct anyways, but there are certainly child chess prodigies or mathematical savants who show profound skill in an area well before they ever formal training in it. The same is true of all variety of skills.

No, no one is just smart. Just becuse you can be a prodigy in chess does not mean you have an essential quick way of learning everything given to you. Although genius might be a term some might recognize as smart, it is only being used to describe the leve of thinking beyond that of a normal person.
I am saying no one is smart in the context of this example: computer assembly.

This is one of the most absurd statements I've ever heard. What goal are you even talking about, the goal of impressing a gaggle of idiot high school teachers whose positions are roughly equivalent to sinecures? If I want to learn about, for example, the philosophy of science, I can go to a library and pick up books by Thomas Kuhn and Karl Popper. I can then read them, and given that I understand them I will probably give every indication that I understood them when I get in conversation with other knowledgeable individuals about the subject.

No, you are not impressing anyone; You are using the tools of education and information to use for *yourself* and when you get down to it, those "gaggle of idiots" are the ones who put in a good word for you to get into a high end university. If you think that learning is solely based on reading books, then you are sadly mistaken. We gain effieciancy through practice. Surely, just becuase you read a book on philiosphy it does not make you effieciant in its practices.

Chance, maybe. Resources or treatment? Maybe not.

Chance, indef. Resources, more than likely. Treatmeant, probable. School is school. If you are mistreated for what ever reason, it does not prevent you from acquiring the information. Resources are there. There are set standards in what you need to learn and when you need to learn them. A school hires teachers who have been given a degree which surely give them the credit to teach. Saying that there are no resources is absurd.

Actually it's closer to a constitutional republic, although the whole constitutional part is going away rather quickly.

Touche. Although we still do have a word, no matter how small it is, that goes into our governments actions.

What are you talking about, a $20,000 annual average salary for High School graduates? The amount of money spent per student on public education? In either of these instances what you are saying is nonsensical.

It is proven that grauates tend to make more money a year which means more money to suit a better life style or an even higher education. Again, the government invests money into the schools and teachers and programs all for the benefit of a child. $20,000 is a -reasonable- amount. Depending on the area, it could be more or less. The education they are giving you is a lower end option of college. You are learning criteria that specializes in a certain aspect of a field or corresponding study. Learning is not free.

There is a wealth of things to debate about. For instance, if a person wants to make money and live happily at the moment, why shouldn't they be allowed to? Why is the basic opportunity structure of this country so reliant of Government, and is this detrimental to individuals? Does the government even have a right to put things on the table for us, and can it do so effectively?

These are all core questions which largely seem to be asked by the OP himself. Answer them.

The governemtn is there for order among the peoples. All they do is give out the particular requirements needed for a better life style. If the government did not care, they would invest so much money into teaching kids. If they wanted to make people poor and keep them that way they would rather stop funding schools and enroll numerous people in unemployment where they can govern how much you make. Such a palce exists; This place is called Cuba.
They do have the right to lay everything out for us, but they are not going to beg for you to take it. It is up to you. they encourage that you study and stay in school so that you do not have to live in pverty, but they are not going to shove it down your throat; They will let you experience life without proper eduation in poverty because *you* did not listen to them otherwise.

It's in all people to a greater or lesser extent, ignorance is just the lack of knowledge and no one is omniscient. You seem incredibly ignorant about economics, for example.

I took US History AP my freshman year. I took World History AP my sophpmore year. I am taking US Government AP and American Economics AP this year. My knowledge on politics and economics is much more higher than where it should be, seeing how Government is a Senior Only class and I am a Junior. I love philosophy and politics along with economics and religion. The principals have passed down since early civilizations and have not changed. I understand these principals with extensive knowledge. To say I am ignorant in my major is baffling to say the least.

[somerndmguy]

I will contribute what little I have.

The purpose of school isn't just so that you know facts, or figures, or memorize numbers. A good education will teach you how to use those facts, to analyze those figures, and to find out why things work instead of just having to memorize the fact that they do.

Almost nobody in the working world will require you to recite all the information you memorized about the French Revolution, for example. You will, however, have to solve problems and figure out what makes things work the way they do. Memorizing the quadratic formula in math is nice and all, but deriving the formula for yourself will teach you to see problems in a whole new way, and it will help you understand the problem.

Your own education is strictly under your control. Whether you choose to learn what others are trying to teach you is completely your decision, and nobody else's. Nobody can drill into your brain and fish out the knowledge in your head. What you know is strictly for you alone.

Yes, I'm positive that your situation will probably limit your ability to get a post-secondary education, and yes, this society basically runs on people with diplomas and certificates, but personally, if you at least try to broaden your knowledge and your own education, you'll do infinitely better than others who haven't attended school at all.

My two cents. I stand ready for its surgical dissection.

[Enginuity]

The ideal purpose of school is to prepare students for life later on, not teach them a whole bunch of details that no one remembers years down the road. What people should learn/remember from school isn't who the 27th president of the US is (assuming you are in the US), but what is important, is the process. The process consists of studying towards a goal, managing time, etc., things that are supposed to help you one day. 10 years down the road, you will no longer care that you got an A in history, but the process of studying in order to get an A in the class becomes something you are familiar with. School is intended (directly or indirectly) to teach the population the basics of a language (so people can interact, write, read, in society), study/work habits (you probably cannot get a work permit without having sufficient grades, because you have not shown the ability, at least to the schools, to do everything that you have been asked to do), social skills (creating an environment where you can meet people your age), etc.

Grades are not so important, in theory. It is important to other people (bosses, college admissions people), because it is one of the few things that have a chance at determining the kind of person you are, not that it is always accurate.

Yeah, kids/students in low-income families probably have less, if any motivation to do well in school, especially when there are many other things that are more immediately important, ex. eating. The people who really care about fixing these problems do not have the capabilities to do it, the people who say they are going to fix these problems, and have the capability (monetary resources) do not care about fixing them (at least in the large scale). Honestly, who is going to care about low-income families? Other people either are not that well off, or don't feel that other people are important (perhaps thinking that it is/was their own fault that they are in the situation). The only people who can, and has attempted, to do anything permanent is the government. Charities and such only go so far. The government is far from perfect.

Put it this way. Say you (Coodles, or anyone who is in his situation) suddenly receive a large sum of money, so that it fixes your immediate living problems. Would you have the motivation to help others who are still in that situation, and would you actually help others who are in the situation (people you do not have any emotional/social attachment to)? Idealistically if you were very philantrophic, you would say yes, but as a human, I really doubt that it would happen.

Btw, KA0Z R4VR, you don't have a major... you are in high school (judging from your statements). In addition, just because you are taking these AP classes, does not make you an expert in government and stuff. Honestly, this is the American school system we are talking about. Also, there is no real purpose of saying that you are ahead of where you should be; what defines where you should be? If you think the standards define that, then you are letting yourself be held back by low standards.

Now, for college instruction or whatnot... I mean, a lot of the difference between the salary differences is in part simply due to differences in the job choices available with certain educations, but I think if someone takes the effort to get through a 4-year education, no matter how lazy/smart they are, or regardless of the school they go to, they must have gone through a decent amount of work from time to time, so it makes them more capable of handling work at a job, so it probably increases their chance of getting a promotion or something. As an aside, do people really do work at work (all the time, anyway?), as I have heard more than one instance of people doing other stuff (chatting online, facebook, etc.) while they are on paid time.

[tsugomaru]

The classes you are taking is a poor indicator of what you can do. I can brag about all the AP classes that I'm taking, but if I don't have the goods to show, it might as well be said that I'm not bright. Backing your statements with a list of your classes is not a very good way to prove your facts. I cannot say that Hydrogen is an element because I'm taking AP Chemistry.

That's not to say you aren't smart, because I believe you are, you're just using all the wrong reasons to back up your argument. And it's one of my pet peeves.

~Tsugomaru

[Kilroy_x]

Originally Posted by KA0Z R4VR

No, no one is just smart. Just becuse you can be a prodigy in chess does not mean you have an essential quick way of learning everything given to you.

In this case you are conflating intelligence with ability to quickly master subjects, which is an atypical sense of intelligence at best and at any rate subjective.

I am saying no one is smart in the context of this example: computer assembly.

What is your evidence for this, empirical or otherwise?

No, you are not impressing anyone

This statement is probably false.

You are using the tools of education and information to use for *yourself* and when you get down to it, those "gaggle of idiots" are the ones who put in a good word for you to get into a high end university.

1. Be more specific as to how you think I am using the tools of K-12 education
2. Don't make so many assumptions.

If you think that learning is solely based on reading books, then you are sadly mistaken. We gain effieciancy through practice. Surely, just becuase you read a book on philiosphy it does not make you effieciant in its practices.

There are some types of knowledge which can simply be acquired from books. For example I can learn what a Bunsen burner is, or what the Socratic method is. Learning how to engage in the physical processes associated with using a Bunsen burner, or how to employ the Socratic method to optimum efficiency are things which require practice. Not all forms of knowledge are dependent upon external tests.

At any rate, if you are making the charge that I am unpracticed in anything in particular you would need additional support.

Chance, indef. Resources, more than likely. Treatmeant, probable. School is school.

...really? So an impoverished inner city school is equivalent to a school in a rich suburban area? The conditions of student-teacher relations are uniform across K-12 education?

If you are mistreated for what ever reason, it does not prevent you from acquiring the information.

What is the particular relevance of this? Aside from being clearly false, mistreatment might encompass any number of things including academic mistreatment. Suppose a teacher doesn't like you as a person and grades accordingly? Since it seems grades are a primary form of access to higher education this abuse does indeed limit potential for advancement within our system.

Resources are there.

Not uniformly.

There are set standards in what you need to learn and when you need to learn them. A school hires teachers who have been given a degree which surely give them the credit to teach. Saying that there are no resources is absurd.

Reducing my argument to a universal negative claim is the only absurdity here. I would call it a straw man but honestly that might be giving you too much credit.

Have you at all reviewed the programs that prospective teachers go through in order to get their license? I have. You are claiming that a degree implies competence, I can tell you that is far from the case.

It is proven that grauates tend to make more money a year which means more money to suit a better life style or an even higher education.

Tend to make more money. We are talking measures of central distribution. Comparing a total of 2 criteria is hardly the best way to get an informative picture of the marketplace. Labor specialization will show certain subgroups of members of any education level to earn much higher or much lower average salaries than their counterparts.

Again, the government invests money into the schools and teachers and programs all for the benefit of a child.

Purportedly.

$20,000 is a -reasonable- amount. Depending on the area, it could be more or less. The education they are giving you is a lower end option of college. You are learning criteria that specializes in a certain aspect of a field or corresponding study. Learning is not free.

Problems here:

*You didn't clarify what you are talking about in terms of the $20,000
*You are conflating voluntary purchase of services with coerced purchase of services
*Your admission of non-uniformity contradicts with large amounts of what you have previously stated
*It is impossible to argue what is a -reasonable amount- when the amount is coerced, because value is subjective and therefore determined solely by the act of valuation itself relative to the person making that valuation.

The governemtn is there for order among the peoples. All they do is give out the particular requirements needed for a better life style.

What do these two sentences even have to do with each other?

Show me

1. The government produces order among the peoples
2. Order is desirable
3. The production of order does not result in greater ills that outweigh the good produced by order
4. There are requirements for a "better life style" that only government can give, or that are best supplied by government.

If the government did not care, they would invest so much money into teaching kids.

To begin with, it isn't the Government's money, it is the taxpayers money. To continue, actions might be taken for selfish reasons which still provide for a good. The includes the act of making expenditures, even those which appear altruistic.

If they wanted to make people poor and keep them that way they would rather stop funding schools and enroll numerous people in unemployment where they can govern how much you make. Such a palce exists; This place is called Cuba.

You are conflating intended consequences with actual consequences.

They do have the right to lay everything out for us, but they are not going to beg for you to take it.

...what does the first part of that statement even mean? Surely it can't mean what it actually says, that would be laughably absurd.

they encourage that you study and stay in school so that you do not have to live in pverty, but they are not going to shove it down your throat; They will let you experience life without proper eduation in poverty because *you* did not listen to them otherwise.

You are conflating "proper" education with government education. An all too common mistake made by individuals who see the existence of a monopolistic state of affairs and associate a given service with a given provider. Nevertheless this is yet another issue with what you are saying.

I took US History AP my freshman year. I took World History AP my sophpmore year. I am taking US Government AP and American Economics AP this year. My knowledge on politics and economics is much more higher than where it should be, seeing how Government is a Senior Only class and I am a Junior. I love philosophy and politics along with economics and religion. The principals have passed down since early civilizations and have not changed. I understand these principals with extensive knowledge. To say I am ignorant in my major is baffling to say the least.

Ah, so you are supposed to represent the finest intellect that our public institutions are capable of producing? I feel more confident in my statements than ever before.

Incidentally Philosophy has dramatically broadened over time even if Philosophers tend to come back to the same problems, and your understanding of economics is worthless. No less than 3 schools of economic thought would take issue with the bulk of the statements you have made, and probably a good more would as well. When Marxist and Austrian economists both disagree with you odds are you're full of sh1t.

[jewpinthethird]

COLLEDGE.

In my CT?

[KA0Z R4VR]

Originally Posted by Enginuity

The ideal purpose of school is to prepare students for life later on, not teach them a whole bunch of details that no one remembers years down the road. What people should learn/remember from school isn't who the 27th president of the US is (assuming you are in the US), but what is important, is the process. The process consists of studying towards a goal, managing time, etc., things that are supposed to help you one day. 10 years down the road, you will no longer care that you got an A in history, but the process of studying in order to get an A in the class becomes something you are familiar with. School is intended (directly or indirectly) to teach the population the basics of a language (so people can interact, write, read, in society), study/work habits (you probably cannot get a work permit without having sufficient grades, because you have not shown the ability, at least to the schools, to do everything that you have been asked to do), social skills (creating an environment where you can meet people your age), etc.

I agree 100%. School is for preparation and it gives the tools you will need later on.

Grades are not so important, in theory. It is important to other people (bosses, college admissions people), because it is one of the few things that have a chance at determining the kind of person you are, not that it is always accurate.

Like I said before, it gives a slight indicator of where your goals are and how they are being set, even though what the OP of this quote is saying is true: Sometimes they are not all accurate, but it is the only means in which a school system can define you.

Btw, KA0Z R4VR, you don't have a major... you are in high school (judging from your statements). In addition, just because you are taking these AP classes, does not make you an expert in government and stuff. Honestly, this is the American school system we are talking about. Also, there is no real purpose of saying that you are ahead of where you should be; what defines where you should be? If you think the standards define that, then you are letting yourself be held back by low standards.

I am taking the college courses. they are immediately applied towards my degree. I attend the College of Southern Nevada for my courses. It is a Political Science major along with my minor, Civil Engineering, where I currently take Physics II AP, Trig. I AP with Calculus intergration, and Architectual Study I. To make up for the immediate high school courses to be accepted into a high end university and recieve a high school diploma, I am attending the Academy for Indivisualized Study where I will soon graduate with an Honors Diploma as a Junior, rather than waste another year, because at the academy the course is at your leisure. It is intended for above level high school students and acts like a pre-college academy, or for middle school students who are not high school credit efficient. I do not set myself on the school standards, but rather with my peers and where I want to be.

------------------------------------
Directed at Kilroy X

What is your evidence for this, empirical or otherwise?

I was simply inferring that the OP stated that he can assemble a computer without going to school. That does not show how smart you are. It comes no where near defining your intelligence. It is simply memory that allows one to put pieces back where they come. Now if you were to build a computer with out instruction, then that is something else.

This statement is probably false.

What are you talking about. If school is self-improvement, then who are you to impress? No one outside yourself. The key word is *self*-improvement.

1. Be more specific as to how you think I am using the tools of K-12 education
2. Don't make so many assumptions.

You learn how to critically think beyond what you normally would. K represents interaction with people and familiarizing with objects and play things. You learn essential ABCs and common commands. 1-5 grade slowly progress the aptitude of a students ability to calculate math, reading and literature. 6-8 elaborate even more so on what you have grasped while in 1-5 grade and teach the mechanics behind what you have learned. For instance, I learned back then that 2-2= 0 when now I see that it is 2+(-2)= 0. And in high school, grades 9-12, one learns the basic principals and mechanics of a field of specialized study like Bio Chem or Trig., which includes all the resources that you learned back then INCLUDING critical thinking to push your mind even further to grasp concepts that are hard to comprehend.

There are some types of knowledge which can simply be acquired from books. For example I can learn what a Bunsen burner is, or what the Socratic method is. Learning how to engage in the physical processes associated with using a Bunsen burner, or how to employ the Socratic method to optimum efficiency are things which require practice. Not all forms of knowledge are dependent upon external tests.

I did not say knowledge is obtained through practice. I can read about cars and tell you how everytyhing works, but that surely does not mean I am a master at driving. I can actually read about driving, but that still does not mean I can drive perfectly. Like I said, efficiancy is gained through practice. While reading and studying provide the fundemental concepts, it does not mean you becomes efficient at what you read on.

At any rate, if you are making the charge that I am unpracticed in anything in particular you would need additional support.

I was not. No additional support needed

...really? So an impoverished inner city school is equivalent to a school in a rich suburban area? The conditions of student-teacher relations are uniform across K-12 education?

Essentially, yes. School is a palce of learning. Just because a school is in a "bad part of town" it does not mean you are learning bad inforamtion. If anything, you are learning the same material at a slower rate.

What is the particular relevance of this? Aside from being clearly false, mistreatment might encompass any number of things including academic mistreatment. Suppose a teacher doesn't like you as a person and grades accordingly? Since it seems grades are a primary form of access to higher education this abuse does indeed limit potential for advancement within our system.

Although the school system is more bureaucratic than what it seems, talking to a counselor and switching out the class *can* be done. Even if one has to make up an excuse to do so like an error with your schedule or misplacement.

Not uniformly.

I am not saying they are there at the same rate as every other place or situation, but yes resources are available. Friends call friends and ask for help. Hotlines and websites are available 24/7. Counselor request forms and teacher confrences, along with many other multitudes of resoruces available to the student. Can't afford a computer to go online? Go to the library at the school where it is free. Can't call a friend? Talk to them in school when you see them. Need further assistance? Speak to a teacher privately for tutoring and after-school lessons.

Reducing my argument to a universal negative claim is the only absurdity here. I would call it a straw man but honestly that might be giving you too much credit.

Have you at all reviewed the programs that prospective teachers go through in order to get their license? I have. You are claiming that a degree implies competence, I can tell you that is far from the case.

I just read this like 30 mintues ago from my academy handbook lol. Teachers in high school are required to take an abilities test on learning and teaching. I can not recall the test or acronym for it, but it is along the lines of a [DQMOT] "Secondary Quality of Education Assestment". They are certified to teach the course they have a specialized degree in, as oppose to elematary teachers who only need a degree in being an overall teacher.

Tend to make more money. We are talking measures of central distribution. Comparing a total of 2 criteria is hardly the best way to get an informative picture of the marketplace. Labor specialization will show certain subgroups of members of any education level to earn much higher or much lower average salaries than their counterparts.

I stated that they tend to make more money based on what statistics have proven. Also, keep in mind that if someone were to stay in school and study in a certain field that appeals to them, they or more likely to find a career in their study, which more than lilely is going to be specialized where a degree is needed.

Example: Jimmy was intersted in science. He later grew fascinated with creatures and the ocean. As he progressed in high school, he took Bio. Chem. and Zoology. After hard work and patience he later earned a degree in Marine Biology from a secondary institution.

I am inferring that -most- people go to a secondary school for a specific study.

Problems here:

*You didn't clarify what you are talking about in terms of the $20,000
*You are conflating voluntary purchase of services with coerced purchase of services
*Your admission of non-uniformity contradicts with large amounts of what you have previously stated
*It is impossible to argue what is a -reasonable amount- when the amount is coerced, because value is subjective and therefore determined solely by the act of valuation itself relative to the person making that valuation.

$20,000 in the form of knowledge and education. Tey are taking the time to incorporate what you have learned with what you want to become. If you want to be a civil engineer you must have had some extensive knowledge into what you think it is about. In school you must have learned a trade that will make you money one day. The time invested at school will pay off. The schools give you the education. It pays off [hopefully] when you learn and achieve your career.

What do these two sentences even have to do with each other?

Show me

1. The government produces order among the peoples
2. Order is desirable
3. The production of order does not result in greater ills that outweigh the good produced by order
4. There are requirements for a "better life style" that only government can give, or that are best supplied by government.

The first sentense is to infer that the government keeps everything on tract as best alofted. The government makes laws. We obey them. They set standards. We meet and pass them. Order *is* desirable, hence why -we- decided to enforce a democratic form of rule. We have all heard it. The Constitution of the United States of America; It outlines our government and in the preamble, it clearly states why.

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

To begin with, it isn't the Government's money, it is the taxpayers money. To continue, actions might be taken for selfish reasons which still provide for a good. The includes the act of making expenditures, even those which appear altruistic.

Wow, if you want to get technical, then let's. So, let us take your statement to the extreme. You are saying that the tax payers meet up every Tuesday and throw a chunck of cash in hopes that everything will work correctly and the government just runs by and decides what to do with it at their leisure and expence? We pay a federal government tax. Let us not forget the term government and what is represents, to regulate. It is a regulation tax that allows them to excersie the authority of our nation which includes the school system. Yes, we pay the teachers bills and run the system, but it is the government who is (loosely using the word) orgainzing where the money goes and why.

You are conflating intended consequences with actual consequences.

Don't you think that if the government wanted to keep out money they would stop education? It is alot easier for them to send someone a check of $200 every month, rather than to invest and regulate millions and millions of tax payers money.

...what does the first part of that statement even mean? Surely it can't mean what it actually says, that would be laughably absurd.

It is reffering to your post - Does the government have the right to put things on the table for us and can they do it effectively?

I believe they can. All they are doing is giving you basic tools to learn and progress. It costs them time and money along with the tax payers, but they are not going to force someone to take there help.

You are conflating "proper" education with government education. An all too common mistake made by individuals who see the existence of a monopolistic state of affairs and associate a given service with a given provider. Nevertheless this is yet another issue with what you are saying.

How so? As I said before, they are allowing the tools to be used. In fact, they are somewhat making it mandatory to use them, as in truancy is a punishable crime now, but if one were to somehow get around that and drop out and work, they are not going to care otherwise because you obvisouly did not want the help, or could not handle it for what ever given reason and have decided to work for an income.

Ah, so you are supposed to represent the finest intellect that our public institutions are capable of producing? I feel more confident in my statements than ever before.

No, I am not. Do not assume where I am comming from or where I am getting at. I am simply implying that I do have some knowledge in what I am talking about and the courses simply support it.

Incidentally Philosophy has dramatically broadened over time even if Philosophers tend to come back to the same problems, and your understanding of economics is worthless. No less than 3 schools of economic thought would take issue with the bulk of the statements you have made, and probably a good more would as well. When Marxist and Austrian economists both disagree with you odds are you're full of sh1t.

Read carefully next time. The principals have not changed. The ideas have changed with some regards to the principals. Philosophies have changed. Cultural diffusion is the cause. Ideas and practices are spread. Laws are obeied and re-created to ensure welfare. All I am saying is that I understand the mechanics behind laws, the government, and logical thinking that has been spread down since early Rome to modern Western Civilizations. I see where I made a mistake in my post saying that they have not changed, but I was speaking in terms of principals. It essentially makes up a history and government class. Several theories are based on the same principals such as gravity e.g. Newton to Einstein. But, as far as the idea that is implied, the outcome of new ideas are endless.

[Kilroy_x]

Originally Posted by KA0Z R4VR

I was simply inferring that the OP stated that he can assemble a computer without going to school. That does not show how smart you are. It comes no where near defining your intelligence. It is simply memory that allows one to put pieces back where they come. Now if you were to build a computer with out instruction, then that is something else.

Both actions require some sort of mental skill set, and such skills are indicative of intelligence. If you want to say this is a level of intelligence which is arbitrary that is one thing, but I don't see how you couldn't call it a form of intelligence.

What are you talking about. If school is self-improvement, then who are you to impress? No one outside yourself. The key word is *self*-improvement.

Did I state that it was my intention to impress anyone? No. Was what you described in the section of your post which I was quoting equivalent to self improvement? Yes. moreover I am amazed you would argue such a thing as this. The purpose of something may be self improvement. That doesn't mean self improvement can't have a purpose outside itself.

You learn how to critically think beyond what you normally would.

I almost certainly did not gain this ability from K-12 education. If made any such gains in conjunction with K-12 education I would argue it is to a negligible extent that could have been attained by alternate means.

K represents interaction with people and familiarizing with objects and play things.

None of those things are exclusive to K-12 education.

You learn essential ABCs and common commands.

Some people know their abc's prior to their introduction in early grade school. At any rate, you would have to show me that K-12 education is exclusively capable or at least best positioned to teach these things.

1-5 grade slowly progress the aptitude of a students ability to calculate math, reading and literature. 6-8 elaborate even more so on what you have grasped while in 1-5 grade and teach the mechanics behind what you have learned. For instance, I learned back then that 2-2= 0 when now I see that it is 2+(-2)= 0. And in high school, grades 9-12, one learns the basic principals and mechanics of a field of specialized study like Bio Chem or Trig., which includes all the resources that you learned back then INCLUDING critical thinking to push your mind even further to grasp concepts that are hard to comprehend.

See previous.

I did not say knowledge is obtained through practice. Like I said, efficiancy is gained through practice. While reading and studying provide the fundemental concepts, it does not mean you becomes efficient at what you read on.

How does K-12 education necessarily increase the efficiency of applied knowledge?

Essentially, yes. School is a palce of learning. Just because a school is in a "bad part of town" it does not mean you are learning bad inforamtion. If anything, you are learning the same material at a slower rate.

I'm not particularly sure you even understand the criticism. In some schools textbooks are not available because they cannot afford them. In some schools gang members beat you to your knees if you come across the wrong way. Both of these things demonstrate rather large inequities in resources and treatment, respectively. Even so your statement that some people will learn material at a slower rate due to social conditions is still an acceptance of the fact of inequity, just an incomplete acceptance.

Although the school system is more bureaucratic than what it seems, talking to a counselor and switching out the class *can* be done. Even if one has to make up an excuse to do so like an error with your schedule or misplacement.

Ah, but what if the counselor is biased against you as well? Or what if a particular school doesn't have a counselor, or if circumstances of your life prevent you from jumping through all the necessary bureaucratic hoops? What if dropping an excess of classes causes you to graduate 2 years late which has the same dissuading effect on top universities as if you had a low GPA? And so on and so forth...

I am not saying they are there at the same rate as every other place or situation, but yes resources are available. Friends call friends and ask for help. Hotlines and websites are available 24/7. Counselor request forms and teacher confrences, along with many other multitudes of resoruces available to the student. Can't afford a computer to go online? Go to the library at the school where it is free. Can't call a friend? Talk to them in school when you see them. Need further assistance? Speak to a teacher privately for tutoring and after-school lessons.

I was talking mostly about resources on the school side of the equation, which are beyond individual control. For instance what if your school doesn't have a library, or doesn't have computers. Hell, what if there are regulations on how long you can use the computers that are there, or how many books you can check out?

I just read this like 30 mintues ago from my academy handbook lol. Teachers in high school are required to take an abilities test on learning and teaching. I can not recall the test or acronym for it, but it is along the lines of a [DQMOT] "Secondary Quality of Education Assestment". They are certified to teach the course they have a specialized degree in, as oppose to elematary teachers who only need a degree in being an overall teacher.

Teachers of any sort typically need either a bachelors in education or to have completed a seperate program to become a licensed teacher. Training in teaching ability is what I would consider questionable, although I am damn certain that there are not a lot of K-12 educators who truly know the material they are teaching. This is generally less true in area's like social studies and more true in area's like science, but I hold to the statement.

Example: Jimmy was intersted in science. He later grew fascinated with creatures and the ocean. As he progressed in high school, he took Bio. Chem. and Zoology. After hard work and patience he later earned a degree in Marine Biology from a secondary institution.

I am inferring that -most- people go to a secondary school for a specific study.

Then you are no longer talking about the demographic of individuals with a high school level of education and what you are talking about is completely irrelevent to the contention.

$20,000 in the form of knowledge and education.

...those are abstract concepts. Where exactly should I go to buy them?

What you should be saying is "$20,000 that goes to educators salaries, school building upkeep, school equipment, textbooks, etc." Those are the real, tangible things the money is being spent on.

The time invested at school will pay off. The schools give you the education. It pays off [hopefully] when you learn and achieve your career.

You sold me at hopefully!

The first sentense is to infer that the government keeps everything on tract as best alofted.

I think your vocabulary is broken. I'm not even sure I can call this statement wrong because it's more or less gibberish.

Order *is* desirable, hence why -we- decided to enforce a democratic form of rule.

Kid, maybe one or two posts ago it was established that the role democracy plays in this country is minimal. You would do well not to randomly conflate 20 or 30 different things every time you try and articulate a concept, because it gives people the distinct impression you don't actually understand the concepts you are talking about.

We have all heard it. The Constitution of the United States of America; It outlines our government and in the preamble, it clearly states why.

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

This doesn't demonstrate a single of the things I asked you to demonstrate.

Wow, if you want to get technical, then let's.

Oh. My. God.

I think I know what your problem is now. You're intellectually lazy, disinterested, and on the whole worthless.

So, let us take your statement to the extreme. You are saying that the tax payers meet up every Tuesday and throw a chunck of cash in hopes that everything will work correctly and the government just runs by and decides what to do with it at their leisure and expence?

Heh, you "inferred" all that from the simple statement that the government gets its money from taxes? Keep digging that hole buddy.

This isn't an extreme form of my statement. This is a different statement.

We pay a federal government tax. Let us not forget the term government and what is represents, to regulate. It is a regulation tax that allows them to excersie the authority of our nation which includes the school system. Yes, we pay the teachers bills and run the system, but it is the government who is (loosely using the word) orgainzing where the money goes and why.

This response doesn't even have meaning.

Me: The government gets its money from the taxpayer
You: If you want to get technical, fine. But keep in mind not only do they get the money from the taxpayer, they also spend the money on things. Not only that, but the government interferes in the economic sphere.
Me: ...

Don't you think that if the government wanted to keep out money they would stop education?

You're still conflating intended outcome with actual outcome. Stop it.

It is alot easier for them to send someone a check of $200 every month, rather than to invest and regulate millions and millions of tax payers money.

The government is incapable of investment, it is only capable of expenditure. And no, printing off $200 a month for an entire country would create hyperinflation and make the dollar worthless. How the hell is economics your major? Where do you even go to school?

I believe they can.

Do you also believe they have the right to? This would imply they have the right to take money from their citizens, since the government does not produce anything on its own.

All they are doing is giving you basic tools to learn and progress.

Non-uniformly, at taxpayer expense, when other methods of learning and progressing would almost certainly do just as well if not better, and when the establishment of this system creates a stacked opportunity structure which makes the entire rest of a person's life dependent on how well they did at attaining arbitrary status symbols within an equally arbitrary and illegitimate system.

It costs them time and money along with the tax payers,

False, it only costs the taxpayers money. The government by definition cannot produce, it can only consume.

How so? As I said before, they are allowing the tools to be used. In fact, they are somewhat making it mandatory to use them, as in truancy is a punishable crime now[blah blah blah yada yada yada]

Maybe if you would actually try reading instead of just talking you would finally, truly learn something. The tools come from somewhere, that somewhere being the taxpayer. If the government did not create these particular tools in this particular way, other tools would come into existence. Almost certainly better tools. Hence we compare your tools and the new tools, and since the new tools are better we take those.

Part of the reason the new tools are better is they cost less, in terms of money and in terms of fewer ruined human lives.

I am simply implying that I do have some knowledge in what I am talking about and the courses simply support it.

Well that can't be right, you've clearly demonstrated a rather profound lack of knowledge. So in turn we see that your courses are worthless.

Read carefully next time. The principals have not changed. The ideas have changed with some regards to the principals.

Oh, ok. So "The unexamined life is not worth living" is an identical principle to "These glorious new Philosophers will be Philosophers of the moment, trusting their instincts." Yeah, thanks for clearing that up.

Philosophies have changed.

Philosophies include principles.

All I am saying is that I understand the mechanics behind laws, the government, and logical thinking that has been spread down since early Rome to modern Western Civilizations.

You really don't seem to.

I see where I made a mistake in my post saying that they have not changed, but I was speaking in terms of principals. It essentially makes up a history and government class. Several theories are based on the same principals such as gravity e.g. Newton to Einstein. But, as far as the idea that is implied, the outcome of new ideas are endless.

Y'know, I sort of stopped being able to even figure out what you're talking about. Maybe when your statements stop reading like a bunch of buzzwords randomly juxtaposed amidst one another I'll be able to respond better. If that ever happens, that is.

[lord_carbo]

Originally Posted by devonin

Your overuse of profanity, your spelling and grammatical errors, the terrible flow of your ideas, your inability to communicate in an effective manner, all of these are failings that the education system is designed to educate you out of.

Hahahahahahahahahahaha.

Coodles: I think school sucks!
CT: We can tell!

Originally Posted by Kilroy_x

When Marxist and Austrian economists both disagree with you odds are you're full of sh1t.

Hahahaha, high five.

Originally Posted by Kilroy_x

Teachers of any sort typically need either a bachelors in education or to have completed a seperate program to become a licensed teacher. Training in teaching ability is what I would consider questionable, although I am damn certain that there are not a lot of K-12 educators who truly know the material they are teaching.

Kilroy, just curious, what's your opinion on school vouchers?