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

[Kilroy_x]

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

There are plenty of schools of philosophical thought that disagree with you on that one.

Are any of them less than 100 years old?

There are all kinds of things that are good for people that they don't desire. For example the eight year old who does not desire to eat his vegetables.

Ok, in this case vegetables create a condition which some would call desirable, namely health. However the vegetables aren't desired in and of themselves. There is also the possibility that some people don't value health.

[Chrissi]

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

Chrissi, there are two main problems with some of what you said

Firstly, you seem to be holding people hostage to the actions of others. You do this once when you state that the OP can better his fortunes if only his mother improves herself.

I don't remember saying this.

You do it again when you say that even smart people should be forced to attend school because of the benefits of schooling to less intelligent people.

I did say that school is beneficial to less intelligent people, but I also explained why it's good for smart people. Even though some people ARE just "born smart", it doesn't mean they know everything they need to know. Education ensures that we are all fit to be citizens when we mature. A genius in math still needs to know english. Likewise, a genius in english still needs to know math. This is basic stuff.

And many people would say that, at the ages of 16 and under, children/adolescents/teenagers don't exactly know what's best for them, so letting them choose whether they want to school or not doesn't really work. There are benefits for EVERYONE for attending school, not just those with less intelligence.

Secondly, you state categorically that learning is good without providing a basis for it. To avoid confusion, nothing can be good in and of itself. All good is subjective. Hence if there exist individuals who do not desire education, education is not good for them.

I think education is good because an educated society is a good thing to have. This is a means to an end. I think it's just good to have an educated society. Hopefully most people would agree. If you don't agree, you can go ahead and call moot point on everything I just said.

[Kilroy_x]

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

I don't remember saying this.

For one thing, you said that you and your mother have smoking habits. If you kicked that, you'd have more money. It's been said that "where there's a will, there's a way" (I hate using cliches, but I think it's oddly appropriate here). If you really wanted a better environment, you'd both quit smoking.

I did say that school is beneficial to less intelligent people, but I also explained why it's good for smart people. Even though some people ARE just "born smart", it doesn't mean they know everything they need to know. Education ensures that we are all fit to be citizens when we mature. A genius in math still needs to know english. Likewise, a genius in english still needs to know math. This is basic stuff.

This is rubbish. There are plenty of jobs which require very deep knowledge of one area and almost no knowledge of other areas.

And many people would say that, at the ages of 16 and under, children/adolescents/teenagers don't exactly know what's best for them, so letting them choose whether they want to school or not doesn't really work. There are benefits for EVERYONE for attending school, not just those with less intelligence.

Many people would say no one knows what's best for them. These people include the world's Hitlers and Stalins. Why draw the line at any one age? People make bad decisions at every age. That doesn't justify restricting freedom.

You would also have a DAMN hard time convincing me that someone intelligent who was forced to go to school and ended up getting knifed to death for seeming too pompous to the wrong person benefited from mandatory schooling. Or someone who was given C's and D's for disagreeing with the teacher's political beliefs because they were intelligent enough to have formulated their own opinions about things. Or someone who was sent to alternative school because they made the mistake of trusting the wrong teacher with information about their sexual identity or orientation.

These people exist, and if you want to keep spouting off the type of nonsense you are now maybe you should answer to them first.

I think education is good because an educated society is a good thing to have. This is a means to an end. I think it's just good to have an educated society.

Circular proof. Circularity generally indicates unfalsifiability. Unfalsifiability indicates lack of substance. Hence lack of legitimacy.

Hopefully most people would agree.

That's not the point. The people who would agree should work for an educated society by educating themselves and by working through voluntary means to encourage others to pursue education. Not by force.

If you don't agree, you can go ahead and call moot point on everything I just said.

What you said isn't moot, it's foolhardy, arrogant, and demeaning.

[devonin]

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

This is rubbish. There are plenty of jobs which require very deep knowledge of one area and almost no knowledge of other areas.

And so with nothing but that specialized knowledge of one area, you are perfectly capable of doing that job...Chrissi's point was that an education also gives you necessary skills and knowledge for simply living your life outside the bounds of doing that job.

[Kilroy_x]

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

All necessary skills and knowledge for living life outside of one's job are pretty much learned by day to day experience and social interaction anyways. All unnecessary skills are irrelevent to the issue.

I also love the "functioning democracy" argument I hear from so many K-12 teachers. If education ensures a functioning democracy then shouldn't we fu(king have one by now?

[Chrissi]

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

You would also have a DAMN hard time convincing me that someone intelligent who was forced to go to school and ended up getting knifed to death for seeming too pompous to the wrong person benefited from mandatory schooling. Or someone who was given C's and D's for disagreeing with the teacher's political beliefs because they were intelligent enough to have formulated their own opinions about things. Or someone who was sent to alternative school because they made the mistake of trusting the wrong teacher with information about their sexual identity or orientation.

These people exist, and if you want to keep spouting off the type of nonsense you are now maybe you should answer to them first.

These people are exceptions. All I can say is that generally, education is good for most people. There are obviously going to be some casualties in any system you put up. Do you think that there would be less problems if every child was allowed to choose for him or herself whether they can go to school?

I'm not saying "everything's perfect and everyone will be happy if they just complete their mandatory minimum education and we are all free and equal and we can be whatever we want to be and you can be the president if you just get that high school diploma." No. This isn't how the world works. Not everyone is put in the same situation. And things happen no matter what system you implement.

In other words, I never said mandatory education was a perfect system, nor did I intend to make anyone think it was. I just think it's generally good for most people, and you're going to be hard-pressed coming up with a better way to make sure as many people as possible are fairly well-off regardless of what social class they come from.

However, if you do have a better idea, I'd honestly love to hear it (no sarcasm. Trust me. This is CT) and consider its merits.

All necessary skills and knowledge for living life outside of one's job are pretty much learned by day to day experience and social interaction anyways. All unnecessary skills are irrelevent to the issue.

Well, for some people, these skills are gained ouside of school. For others, who aren't in the same situation, school is the only place where they will gain insight into society and its functions and the prerequisites they need to function in it.

A bit of a personal story: As hoitytoity and educated as I am, I'm not good at social interaction. If I hadn't been going to school, I would have had ZERO social interaction during my childhood and adolescence. I am somewhat more sociable now, and have been dealing with my social fears as of late. But as a child, I wanted nothing to do with anyone. I think most of this was due to my upbringing. My mother strongly resisted the idea of me socializing; if I wanted to invite a friend over, she'd tell me she has a headache. There was always some half-assed reason for me not to to leave the house and not to let anyone else in.

That's just an example of how education gives everybody a slice of equal opportunity as a child to develop into a citizen. For everyone, it's different. Some kids wouldn't know how to read. There are myriads of different deficiencies that individuals have in their particular social situation. Public education is roughly equalizing. Yes, it's not perfect, and people fall through the cracks, but that's not what we're trying to do. The effort to equalize everyone is there. The effort to ensure everyone is adequately prepared is there. And usually, it works.

What you said isn't moot, it's foolhardy, arrogant, and demeaning.

Listen, we could write pages and pages and pages about why an educated society is an important thing, but I'm not interested in philosophizing in that direction. One of the things I take for granted is that an educated society is a good thing. Circular, foolish, whatever, I don't want to argue it. If you are going to attack my ideas, do it under my pretenses. If you don't like the pretenses, I'm not interested in arguing them. It would take too much of my energy. If you don't like the pretenses, you can easily ignore all my points, since they obviously don't apply if you don't hold the same belief. That's all I am trying to say.

[Coodles]

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

i love it how people come here and try and say im looking for praise or sympathy.

im looking to see what people think.

and if people might use constructive critisism i might be able to get something out of this.

i know people who are in their 40s in colledge, and she STILL hasnt a clue what she wants to finish as.

she still has no idea what she wasnts to be for the rest of her life.

and even so if she chose a job she wouldnt be working like a fresh outta highschool straight through colledge person she took her time in years.

so even after finally finishing in something she would have the disadvantage because she is older and wouldnt have to work as many years as others before she could retire.

a manager looks at 2 people and says this ones about 24. and this ones about 46 hmm... ill get more time and work out of the 24 year old if he stays with the same line of work his entire life more than i will the 46 year old who would have less time before she retires hire the 24 year old.

iam 15. iam not that old. i understand i have more to learn in life and more time to decide what i would like to excel in, in years.

no i dont check my grammar. why do it? for public appeal? XDD

no thanks. ill write my thoughts and if people cant figure out what im saying then im sorry just dont leave your thoughts.

i came here to try and get some good seggestions on my topic not to get attacked by people for my grammar errors and such, if i really cared about it i would fix it.

so what i would like to say is please if your going to attack my grammar or spelling. why dont you save me my eyes and other readers eyes time. and just

dont post a reply ^_^

i have seen some good thoughts out there and i like that.

ive seen harsh words that have made sense to me.

but i rather it not be harsh.

make it nice simple seggestions or points.

if your going to quote me and switch the quote to something like

Coodles says:
"my topic sucks"

or something.

thats really not that funny. its just demeaning to yourself and makes you look like a 5 year old.

in any case thank you to those who have left good thoughts.

my friend who studies sociology says her teacher was looking for a paper kinda like this so im going to have her look at it and see if she wants to take it to her teacher.

^_^

POST ON! ^_^

[Kilroy_x]

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

These people are exceptions.

Yes, yes they are. Exceptions break the rule. You stated a universal, I disproved it.

All I can say is that generally, education is good for most people. There are obviously going to be some casualties in any system you put up. Do you think that there would be less problems if every child was allowed to choose for him or herself whether they can go to school?

Less problems, absolutely. That's precisely what the issue is. Even with imperfection as a guarantee we are obligated to strive for what little we can achieve.

In other words, I never said mandatory education was a perfect system, nor did I intend to make anyone think it was. I just think it's generally good for most people, and you're going to be hard-pressed coming up with a better way to make sure as many people as possible are fairly well-off regardless of what social class they come from.

Of course I'm not. Unless you would care to explain to me why Milton Friedman's notion of a voucher system is not an improvement, or Murray Rothbard's anarcho-capitalist arguments are invalid.

Well, for some people, these skills are gained ouside of school. For others, who aren't in the same situation, school is the only place where they will gain insight into society and its functions and the prerequisites they need to function in it.

Really? You think the ability to speak comprehensible English couldn't be learned outside the classroom? Or the ability to initiate others in conversation? These skills are learned outside the classroom almost by necessity; to put it another way, any skills that are necessary to learn are going to be learned one way or another if they are going to be learned at all.

A bit of a personal story: As hoitytoity and educated as I am, I'm not good at social interaction. If I hadn't been going to school, I would have had ZERO social interaction during my childhood and adolescence. I am somewhat more sociable now, and have been dealing with my social fears as of late. But as a child, I wanted nothing to do with anyone. I think most of this was due to my upbringing. My mother strongly resisted the idea of me socializing; if I wanted to invite a friend over, she'd tell me she has a headache. There was always some half-assed reason for me not to to leave the house and not to let anyone else in.

Do you really think that if public schooling weren't around you would have just sat around at home? You seem to be mistakenly assuming that public education would be replaced with nothing. This is not the case. I mean for crying out loud, my primary source of socialization was the internet. All public school ever did was made me afraid of people.

That's just an example of how education gives everybody a slice of equal opportunity as a child to develop into a citizen.

No it isn't. It's an example of how one individual was helped by one situation for specific reasons.

Yes, it's not perfect, and people fall through the cracks, but that's not what we're trying to do.

And blood letting isn't supposed to kill your patient, but it's still equally backwards.

Listen, we could write pages and pages and pages about why an educated society is an important thing, but I'm not interested in philosophizing in that direction.

Apparently you aren't interested in honesty either.

One of the things I take for granted is that an educated society is a good thing. Circular, foolish, whatever, I don't want to argue it.

Case in point.

If you are going to attack my ideas, do it under my pretenses.

What pretenses are those? If you hold that education is a good thing, you should adopt policy which generates the best forms of education. That's what a free-market policy would do.

If you don't like the pretenses, I'm not interested in arguing them. It would take too much of my energy. If you don't like the pretenses, you can easily ignore all my points, since they obviously don't apply if you don't hold the same belief. That's all I am trying to say.

All you're trying to say is that you're lazy and arrogant. Got it.

[Chrissi]

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

Apparently you aren't interested in honesty either.

All you're trying to say is that you're lazy and arrogant. Got it.

I take offense to this. Please don't attack me. This is inappropriate behaviour.

You're obviously only interested in belittling me and trying to make it seem like I have ill intentions. Not interested in honesty? I haven't said anything dishonest. Grow up a little before you try to argue some more.

[Cavernio]

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

I liked your first post Kilroy. It then went all downhill from there as you then dragged everyone into meta-discussion, with you straw-manning left right and center. Puh-leeze, you even pulled the 'school's harbor violence' card, as if violence doesn't exist elsewhere!

to put it another way, any skills that are necessary to learn are going to be learned one way or another if they are going to be learned at all.

You like this idea waaaay too much. What's necessary for living and what's desirable are very different things.

I think I heard you once say that you left school at something like the age of 15 to teach yourself. Mandatory education isn't mandatory public schooling, so quit pretending that it is.

Onto other things...
I think there's been a huge hole in this discussion. At the one end, someone totally blamed coodles for his situation, and at the other, 'government' has nebulously been blamed. Coodles initially seemed pissed about the government because they're not helping him out of his situation, and furthermore, that they allowed the situation in the first place. I agree with that sentiment to an extent, however, as Chrissi said, we may not necessarily know how to help you. Minimum wage laws are supposed to prevent this type of situation, however they clearly don't keep people above the poverty line, and I see that as a serious flaw, one that could likely be rectified. (Although I'm sure Kilroy'll pounce on having minimum wage at all-regardless, it's still easier to work within the system than change it completely.)

Onto the topic of having to have an education to do anything, there's two sides to this. As Kilroy has already pointed out, there are jobs which exist for relatively uneducated people which pay decently. However, most of those positions still require skills. One thing where I agree with Coodles is that it IS getting more and more necessary to get a degree to do anything. Many places won't hire you unless you have a highschool degree, for jobs which clearly don't require you to have working knowledge of most highschool material.

Another problem are people requiring other pieces of paper now for you to do something, beyond a highschool diploma. For instance, in Ontario, in order to be a waitress/waiter, you have to have a Smart Serve certificate or something. That's ridiculous. The skills required for being a waiter have not changed in the past thousands of years, yet in the past 10, we've raised the bar. You now must take a course that's a few days long or something, pass a test, and spend money on doing so. In this particular case for Ontario, this is government legislated. However, it's definitely NOT the case that the government controls all of these new required credentials that are cropping up in the job market. That's a change which society has brought to itself somehow. Perhaps people are becoming more paranoid about things, I dunno, but I definitely don't put the blame for this solely at government feet. In the Smart Serve case, I see the government as simply going with the flow, which is what it's supposed to do, and not being the instigator. That's debatable though.

You also now need your highschool diploma to go to all colleges as far as I know. But that wasn't the case 30 years ago. If you wanted to be a mechanic, you could leave school early, and study to become a mechanic. Now you have to have to good grades in English and Math; you have to know things like what a hypotenuse is, and you have to have read Shakespeare, in order to learn how to fix an engine. To me, that doesn't make sense. However, apparently people feel that it does. Chrissi is one of them.
I worked at grocery/department-esque store for a few months, and as always, there's gossip in the lunchroom. One of the workers was upset about a supervisor or manager they hired for some section of the store, because the person didn't have a degree. What the person did have was lots of experience. Yet that wasn't enough for her. I don't understand why that wasn't enough for her. I'd MUCH rather have a skilled supervisor than a learned one.
I know some people agree with me, those people who say that grades aren't so important, yet grades are what we're using to base skills on. Sure, there's the issue with grades not being representative, but instead of tackling that issue, I'd rather tackle the issue of hiring differently. Not to say that for some jobs, pieces of paper aren't important, because they definitely are. But not for all.

As to Coodles schooling problems? Devonin said it was a failing of the education system. I suppose it could be seen as that, but first and foremost comes basic human needs, and it's those things which aren't being met. Nutrition is very important for learning.

[Kilroy_x]

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

I take offense to this. Please don't attack me. This is inappropriate behaviour.

I'm not attacking you. I'm attacking your behavior, which meets the exact criteria necessary to be described as lazy and dishonest. If someone says "I don't care about the truth if it comes from a radically different perspective because understanding that perspective would be too much work", that fits the description.

You're obviously only interested in belittling me and trying to make it seem like I have ill intentions.

Really? I guess you missed all the, you know, arguments I made which you have failed to address.

Not interested in honesty? I haven't said anything dishonest.

Yes you have. You claimed not to be interested in the truth, which is the epitome of dishonesty.

Grow up a little before you try to argue some more.

Well, by your own standards this sentence makes you a hypocrite. So yeah, I don't really know what to expect from a dishonest, lazy hypocrite other than nothing. Maybe if I were more mature I wouldn't bother with such lost causes. Or maybe I feel obligated to give you a chance even if you choose to be nothing but dismissive in as many fashions as you know how. Gee, how infantile of me.

[Kilroy_x]

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

I liked your first post Kilroy. It then went all downhill from there as you then dragged everyone into meta-discussion, with you straw-manning left right and center. Puh-leeze, you even pulled the 'school's harbor violence' card, as if violence doesn't exist elsewhere!

Point out the specific cases of straw-manning. Also it isn't particularly relevant whether violence exists elsewhere, as long as violence exists in schools than forcing people to attend school will inevitably forcibly expose people to violence as well.

You like this idea waaaay too much. What's necessary for living and what's desirable are very different things.

Yes they are. And if what's necessary for living is learned outside of the classroom, then that's enough. Why should everyone be forced to learn things on the sole basis that they might appreciate having learned them later in life?

Mandatory education isn't mandatory public schooling, so quit pretending that it is.

I don't remember saying that it was. This topic is about how the government entraps poor people. Poor people pretty much as a rule cannot afford private schooling. On another note, since education is required by law attendance of private education is likely in at least some cases just as coerced as public education.

Minimum wage laws are supposed to prevent this type of situation, however they clearly don't keep people above the poverty line, and I see that as a serious flaw, one that could likely be rectified. (Although I'm sure Kilroy'll pounce on having minimum wage at all-regardless, it's still easier to work within the system than change it completely.)

Well, Minimum wages are price floors. They do hurt employers in various ways. For example, look at the use of immigrant labor. Immigrants are perfectly willing to work for less than minimum wage and they subsist on it. However there are cases in which farmers have chosen not to harvest their own crops because their employee base was deported and they simply couldn't afford to do so.

We should fix a lot of other problem's with economic policy before touching minimum wage, but ideally it needs to go.

Another problem are people requiring other pieces of paper now for you to do something, beyond a highschool diploma. For instance, in Ontario, in order to be a waitress/waiter, you have to have a Smart Serve certificate or something. That's ridiculous. The skills required for being a waiter have not changed in the past thousands of years, yet in the past 10, we've raised the bar. You now must take a course that's a few days long or something, pass a test, and spend money on doing so. In this particular case for Ontario, this is government legislated. However, it's definitely NOT the case that the government controls all of these new required credentials that are cropping up in the job market. That's a change which society has brought to itself somehow. Perhaps people are becoming more paranoid about things, I dunno, but I definitely don't put the blame for this solely at government feet. In the Smart Serve case, I see the government as simply going with the flow, which is what it's supposed to do, and not being the instigator. That's debatable though.

The difference seems to be scale. The government apparently requires everyone in Ontario who wants to work as a waiter or waitress to become certified. Individual business certification might dissuade employees from going to work for an individual business. Government mandated certification like this served to dissuade people from entering entire job markets.

You also now need your highschool diploma to go to all colleges as far as I know.

This is false. You need your high school diploma and a high GPA to enter most prestigious colleges, but a significant number will accept non-graduates and a dramatically larger number will accept GED recipients.

[devonin]

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

Just to interject one or two little clarifications and comments:

For instance, in Ontario, in order to be a waitress/waiter, you have to have a Smart Serve certificate or something. That's ridiculous.

This is actually not true. The SmartServe certification is qhat qualifies you to serve and sell alcohol. My mother worked as a bartender some number of years ago and there was a course that had to be taken first. If anything, they've lowered the requirements because Smart Serve is more readily available, faster, and most places of employment will pay to have their employees certified. But to simply work as a waiter/waitress requires no particular certification or training.

Also it isn't particularly relevant whether violence exists elsewhere, as long as violence exists in schools than forcing people to attend school will inevitably forcibly expose people to violence as well.

I find this particular bit of logic to be pretty ridiculous. "Schools expose people to violence", "Yeah well, everything exposes people to violence" "But school is part of everything, so not going to school lessens exposure to violence"

Schools don't necessarily expose people to violence, that's a hasty generalization about schools. My highschool in the 5 years I was there, had a grand total of two fights on school property, neither of which involved weapons, neither of which involved more than two people, neither of which lasted more than 5 minutes. So, 10 minutes of isolated and minor violence (5 of which I didn't even personally witness) out of the over 75,000 minutes I spent at school, somehow I don't think "But schools expose you to violence" is an especially valid objection here.

Certainly many many other areas of publically accessable places seem to demonstrate a higher average instance of violence.

[Kilroy_x]

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

I find this particular bit of logic to be pretty ridiculous. "Schools expose people to violence", "Yeah well, everything exposes people to violence" "But school is part of everything, so not going to school lessens exposure to violence"

That's not the argument. The argument is that specific individuals who would not have otherwise been exposed to specific acts of violence now are.

Schools don't necessarily expose people to violence, that's a hasty generalization about schools.

I didn't claim that they did.

My highschool in the 5 years I was there, had a grand total of two fights on school property, neither of which involved weapons, neither of which involved more than two people, neither of which lasted more than 5 minutes. So, 10 minutes of isolated and minor violence (5 of which I didn't even personally witness) out of the over 75,000 minutes I spent at school, somehow I don't think "But schools expose you to violence" is an especially valid objection here.

You don't understand the objection. Even if your school was representative of every last school on earth, that would still be 4 people per school exposed to specific acts of violence they otherwise would not have been.

Two other things: weapons are not a requirement for serious bodily harm, and most fights don't last more than 5 minutes at any rate. In fact if one person in a fight is sufficiently skilled the fight will probably be over in well under a minute.

The objection is perfectly valid. Maybe you're trying to say it's asinine?

Certainly many many other areas of publically accessable places seem to demonstrate a higher average instance of violence.

Sure. But people have a choice about whether or not they visit these places. For example I don't walk on lonely streets downtown at night without friends because I know from hard experience it can result in violence.

[rade0110]

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

I'm sorry, I only read first half of the first post in this thread. I stopped reading, because I was worried the stupidity was going to seep into my brain. Basically, I read that you (with no formal training/basic education) think that you are capable of all this stuff.

You can take apart and reassemble a computer. Great, do you understand how each piece of the computer works? If someone asked you to fix a computer, could you just look inside the CPU and determine what was wrong with it? Can you use the EQUIPMENT needed to understand what's wrong with it? My guess to your answer on all of my questions is no.

You repeatedly say that a college(not colledge) should just borrow everything to you, then once you're done, be able to give everything back. Here's something you probably don't understand, MOST COLLEGES AREN"T NON-PROFIT. Why do you think they have the ability to reject people?

You claim you and your mom both smoke 2+ packs of cigs a day. Do you realize that if you two didn't do that, You guys could probably buy a house. I live in a fucking nice apartment with my girlfriend, and guess what, it costs less than $800 a month. Plus, why on Earth are you smoking 2 packs a day at the age of 15?!

As for the whole "workers permit" thing. I had a job when I was 14 as a bagboy at a grocery store. I'm pretty sure you can get a job if you truly wanted one. Also, when you turn 16, you can quit school. I guarantee that this computer technician job you're talking about though will never happen. Noone in their right mind would hire a 16 year old kid who doesn't even have a highschool education, a technician job. It won't happen.

I seriously want to jump through my computer and slap you in the face. Highschool is a joke compared to the challenges of college. And guess what, you're a second year freshman in HIGHSCHOOL. This whole "natural born intelligence" thing you keep talking about does not apply in your case. Grow up, finish school and THEN get a job.