WritersBeat.com
 

Go Back   WritersBeat.com > General Discussion > Writers' Cafe

Writers' Cafe Get a drink, sit down to relax, and chit-chat with other writers.


Why the state should educate and support children.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 09-10-2013, 02:56 AM
Crump's Avatar
Crump (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: London
Posts: 1,631
Thanks: 277
Thanks 254
Default Why the state should educate and support children.


I am heartily fed up with those selfish and small minded folk who object to the state providing education and support to children. Those who are most strident in this view tend to have no children themselves, and no plans to have any, and their arguments usually follow a very typical pattern.
“I don’t want any children and I don’t want my tax dollars/pounds to be spent supporting the children of others.”
“If I did choose to have children I would pay for their education and all their needs myself. Nobody should have children unless they are able and willing to do this.”
“The World is overpopulated anyway, so by not having children I’m making a contribution towards preserving scarce resources, why then should I pay for others to squander those resources?”
Ooh, you just want to shake them and smack their silly faces. Not for a moment do they question at what cost, and to whom, did they receive nurturing and what little education seems to have sunk into their brains. They may argue that their parents paid for everything and that the state contributed nothing, which is unlikely; but even so they did not pay for their own upbringing and education, did they?

So they are here ‘scot free’, so to speak, and it behoves them to make a contribution to society’s care of children, especially if they have no plans to bring up children of their own.

As to the argument that the World is overpopulated anyway, they might stop and think who will care for them in their dotage? Who will work in business and industry when they are drawing their pensions? The facts are that unless our societies maintain adequate and educated workforces there will be no-one to care for them, and their carefully saved-for pensions will be worth nothing. That adequate and educated workforce will only be there if we nurture and educate it, it cannot be imported from the Third World.

It is in everyone’s interest that we produce a new generation of citizens, and those who are not personally involved in this activity should make a contribution without carping about it.

__________________
Crump.

Our own right hand the chains must shiver.

Last edited by Crump; 09-10-2013 at 03:01 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-10-2013, 03:45 AM
CandyCane (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 744
Thanks: 147
Thanks 195
Default

Well ive brought three lovely boys into this world, who are state educated and are doing well. Those that argue children should not receive state education should ask a simple question...what if the family of the person who will discover the cure for cancer, cannot afford school. With no state education this bright little person cannot learn, grow and discover a love and aptitude for science etc. The same question can be applied to many other things. If only the top end of rich children go to school, we'll have a lot more David Camerons' and a lot less of those who do things out of love and compassion.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-10-2013, 04:23 AM
Crump's Avatar
Crump (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: London
Posts: 1,631
Thanks: 277
Thanks 254
Default

David Cameron was educated at Eton College of course, so his parents paid quite a bit for his education. However, Eton is in fact a charity, which mean that it receives tax breaks equivalent to about 2,000 per pupil, per year, plus it received 4.5 million of lottery money to build a new sports facility, so even kids at Eton get some state or public support.

There must be very few of us who can claim to have been raised and educated without any public assistance.
__________________
Crump.

Our own right hand the chains must shiver.

Last edited by Crump; 09-10-2013 at 04:26 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-10-2013, 04:24 AM
CandyCane (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 744
Thanks: 147
Thanks 195
Default

I don't dispute it, what I meant was, it will only be the "upper class" who are educated, and less money doesn't mean less potential, can you imagine a world where people like him were the only ones educated....
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-10-2013, 04:30 AM
Crump's Avatar
Crump (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: London
Posts: 1,631
Thanks: 277
Thanks 254
Default

Oh you're quite right. I was just thinking of those, and I have met them, who say, "I received nothing from the state, so why should I give anything to the state?"
__________________
Crump.

Our own right hand the chains must shiver.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-10-2013, 04:34 AM
CandyCane (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 744
Thanks: 147
Thanks 195
Default

I know the ones you mean, sam as those that for the last twenty years have earned 40k+ a year claimed child benefit yet slated those on jobseekers as scroungers...personally I think private school should be scrapped so there's an equal footing, everyone should have the same opportunities, the fact I have less money makes my kids no less academic, or likely to achieve less. Without private schools the state would be forced to improve education, to get the next generation to a level to do the same things the private sector achieves more easily currently
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-10-2013, 05:20 AM
Crump's Avatar
Crump (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: London
Posts: 1,631
Thanks: 277
Thanks 254
Default

Hmm, what's wrong with the British education system deserves a thread of its own. One problem is the so called "universities" that have sprung up in every provincial town and city borough. Now everyone has to get a degree, preferably in media studies or graphic design, just to work at MacDonalds. They end up with a mountain of debt and get a useless qualification.
__________________
Crump.

Our own right hand the chains must shiver.

Last edited by Crump; 09-10-2013 at 05:24 AM..
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Crump For This Useful Post:
CandyCane (09-10-2013)
  #8  
Old 09-10-2013, 06:25 AM
AnyaKimlun's Avatar
AnyaKimlun (Offline)
Samuel Johnson, obviously!
Official Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North East Scotland
Posts: 6,942
Thanks: 2,739
Thanks 1,456
Default

I'm in two minds. My children are not upper class but aside from two mornings a week at nursery for my older two they have never been state educated. If anything the state is an interference.

Whilst I think schools are a necessary evil I do not believe they are the best way to educate children. We insist they mix with kids of all the same age, pander to the middle ground and there is no way it can allow for the individual ways that children learn.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-10-2013, 06:38 AM
Crump's Avatar
Crump (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: London
Posts: 1,631
Thanks: 277
Thanks 254
Default

Originally Posted by AnyaKimlun View Post
I'm in two minds. My children are not upper class but aside from two mornings a week at nursery for my older two they have never been state educated. If anything the state is an interference.

Whilst I think schools are a necessary evil I do not believe they are the best way to educate children. We insist they mix with kids of all the same age, pander to the middle ground and there is no way it can allow for the individual ways that children learn.
You are fairly unique, Anya. I doubt that one in a hundred parents has the time or, more importantly, the ability to manage their own children's education.
__________________
Crump.

Our own right hand the chains must shiver.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-10-2013, 07:00 AM
AnyaKimlun's Avatar
AnyaKimlun (Offline)
Samuel Johnson, obviously!
Official Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North East Scotland
Posts: 6,942
Thanks: 2,739
Thanks 1,456
Default

Originally Posted by Crump View Post
You are fairly unique, Anya. I doubt that one in a hundred parents has the time or, more importantly, the ability to manage their own children's education.

That's because they equate education with school. It actually takes around an hour out of my day with all three of them we don't teach we learn together and all it requires is basic reading, writing, arithmetic etc all the things most people who have gone through the state education system have. I don't need to get them back and forth from school, there is no homework etc. There is also none of the usual involvement with school - if anything we all have more time not less.

It takes far more talent to prevent a never schooled child from learning than it does to teach them. Even when my ME is bad and we don't do much they still make huge strides. My middle child is a little behind but he's got issues that would have left him behind at school. My daughter is working on various projects and I barely see her - which as she is ten is probably about normal.

What it does mean though is I am required to spend time with them and I don't use school as a free babysitter - the latter is why we need a state education system more than anything else. Our economy needs schools however I do think we would be better educated if we only used them for children of the illiterate.

Last edited by AnyaKimlun; 09-10-2013 at 07:04 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-10-2013, 07:35 AM
Crump's Avatar
Crump (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: London
Posts: 1,631
Thanks: 277
Thanks 254
Default

Its not just the illiterate who need them though, is it? We can also include the ill-equipped, the uninterested, the unwilling, the uncertain, the unreliable and so on. You may say it's easy but it does take a certain type of person to do what you do. If we closed schools and relied on parents to do the job the outcome would be disastrous for most children.
__________________
Crump.

Our own right hand the chains must shiver.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-10-2013, 07:45 AM
AnyaKimlun's Avatar
AnyaKimlun (Offline)
Samuel Johnson, obviously!
Official Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North East Scotland
Posts: 6,942
Thanks: 2,739
Thanks 1,456
Default

Originally Posted by Crump View Post
If we closed schools and relied on parents to do the job the outcome would be disastrous for most children.
Why? Because parents would need to take responsibility and actually spend time with their children? Scandalous.

If someone has a basic education themselves then they can teach their child. School harms children as well as helps them and for an awful lot of children it removes their hunger to learn. Home education gives them a chance to figure it out for themselves with a bit of help, to focus on their areas of interests etc
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-10-2013, 08:21 AM
Crump's Avatar
Crump (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: London
Posts: 1,631
Thanks: 277
Thanks 254
Default

Originally Posted by AnyaKimlun View Post
Why? Because parents would need to take responsibility and actually spend time with their children? Scandalous.

If someone has a basic education themselves then they can teach their child. School harms children as well as helps them and for an awful lot of children it removes their hunger to learn. Home education gives them a chance to figure it out for themselves with a bit of help, to focus on their areas of interests etc
I'm sure home education is ideal, given the right parents; with the wrong parents it would be disastrous. Schools may not be perfect, Anya, but at least they provide a better education than than most children would ever get if they didn't exist.
__________________
Crump.

Our own right hand the chains must shiver.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-10-2013, 08:23 AM
AnyaKimlun's Avatar
AnyaKimlun (Offline)
Samuel Johnson, obviously!
Official Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North East Scotland
Posts: 6,942
Thanks: 2,739
Thanks 1,456
Default

Originally Posted by Crump View Post
I'm sure home education is ideal, given the right parents; with the wrong parents it would be disastrous. Schools may not be perfect, Anya, but at least they provide a better education than than most children would ever get if they didn't exist.
You're not giving any good reasons for it though. I get we need schools because we need somewhere for children to go free of charge whilst their parents work.

What I don't understand is why you think parents who can read, write and add up can't teach their children those basic skills along with potty training, sleeping, behaviour etc ?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-10-2013, 08:42 AM
CandyCane (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 744
Thanks: 147
Thanks 195
Default

For I don't believe my level of those core subject is at a level I would want my children to me at. A teacher is trained to a high standard, meaning a child can learn above my own level, especially when they approach GCSE level. Being able to read, write and add up isn't going to get them A* at GCSE (I only got C's).

I don't however see school as a free babysitter, I spend easily an hour a day with them after school, on reading, homework etc and both my school age children started school being able to count and knowing the alphabet.

The second issue with school as a plus for me is the routine and structure. My middle son has the attention span of a dead knat, hes easily distracted and has a tendency to get extremely frustrated, since hes been at school I've found all of these issues settle slightly. Maybe I'm just a bad parent but my eldest is much calmer so cant be all me lol.

I also think it prepares them better in some ways for life outside of school, especially as they get older. Forming friendships, working in peer groups even when you don't like people etc.

Also if we were to scrap schools, what would happen to those with parents who cant be bothered to read a book with them, let alone teach them. Or are o illiterate they can barely write their own name? Do those children get stuck in a "special" school for those with bad/illiterate parents?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-10-2013, 08:43 AM
Crump's Avatar
Crump (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: London
Posts: 1,631
Thanks: 277
Thanks 254
Default

Originally Posted by AnyaKimlun View Post
You're not giving any good reasons for it though. I get we need schools because we need somewhere for children to go free of charge whilst their parents work.

What I don't understand is why you think parents who can read, write and add up can't teach their children those basic skills along with potty training, sleeping, behaviour etc ?
OK, here's my reason. I don't know many parents who would be capable of doing this but I do know many who would not. Where you are the ratios may be reversed, but I would doubt very much that we would find that in the country as a whole most parents could do it. Parents already have the choice to educate their own children, Anya, and very few choose to do so - that alone should sound a warning for your idea. Forcing them to do so would be a big risk with lots of downside if it goes wrong.
__________________
Crump.

Our own right hand the chains must shiver.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-10-2013, 09:08 AM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 4,278
Thanks: 395
Thanks 733
Default

I can't comment on the state of education in Great Britain.

Random.

1. It is a parents job to see to the education of their children. Whether this means home schooling, public school or private school it is ultimately the parents responsibility. Our local public school district does very well, with assessments typically ranking at the top of the state. The choice for us to send our children to this system has been appropriate.

2. Public schools, even in close proximity vary greatly in quality and accomplishment. There are notable urban areas with high cost/student ratios that fail. Illiteracy rates of 50% are good arguments against public schooling in those instances.

3. My kids are my responsibility. I see no reason for others to be taxed to provide for my kids education. I see no reason for people without children, or people whose children are already educated to continue to pay for the education of others. I extend this further because schools are now free meals programs for the children of the indigent.

4. Even good public schools operate at a lower efficiency because they now absorb the children with behavioral or mental deficiencies. Including the retarded with regular children for the sake of "inclusion" or to not have a separate institution is of itself retarded.

5. I think allowing teachers in public schools to be in unions is terrible. It leads to a host of issues from protecting the incompetent to creating a retirement "bubble" which may burst.

Wrap up. See #1 and 2. Typically, areas with industrious people educate their children well, whether in public, private or home environments. Areas where industry has moved on, and a large portion of the population is on the dole have poor education systems. Throwing money at the issue does nothing but enrich a few people.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-10-2013, 10:48 AM
Crump's Avatar
Crump (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: London
Posts: 1,631
Thanks: 277
Thanks 254
Default

Originally Posted by Mohican View Post
I can't comment on the state of education in Great Britain.

Random.

1. It is a parents job to see to the education of their children. Whether this means home schooling, public school or private school it is ultimately the parents responsibility. Our local public school district does very well, with assessments typically ranking at the top of the state. The choice for us to send our children to this system has been appropriate.

2. Public schools, even in close proximity vary greatly in quality and accomplishment. There are notable urban areas with high cost/student ratios that fail. Illiteracy rates of 50% are good arguments against public schooling in those instances.

3. My kids are my responsibility. I see no reason for others to be taxed to provide for my kids education. I see no reason for people without children, or people whose children are already educated to continue to pay for the education of others. I extend this further because schools are now free meals programs for the children of the indigent.

4. Even good public schools operate at a lower efficiency because they now absorb the children with behavioral or mental deficiencies. Including the retarded with regular children for the sake of "inclusion" or to not have a separate institution is of itself retarded.

5. I think allowing teachers in public schools to be in unions is terrible. It leads to a host of issues from protecting the incompetent to creating a retirement "bubble" which may burst.

Wrap up. See #1 and 2. Typically, areas with industrious people educate their children well, whether in public, private or home environments. Areas where industry has moved on, and a large portion of the population is on the dole have poor education systems. Throwing money at the issue does nothing but enrich a few people.
I would agree with everything you've said except that I do believe state education should be paid for out of general taxation, and that it is fitting for childless people, those whose children have grown and businesses to make a contribution.
__________________
Crump.

Our own right hand the chains must shiver.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-10-2013, 12:02 PM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 4,278
Thanks: 395
Thanks 733
Default

Originally Posted by Crump View Post
I would agree with everything you've said except that I do believe state education should be paid for out of general taxation, and that it is fitting for childless people, those whose children have grown and businesses to make a contribution.
I will still disagree. And may ask for you to define general taxation. Is this Property Tax, Income Tax, or a Consumption Tax.

In my state within the United States (Ohio) the Ohio Supreme Court had decreed some years ago that it was unconstitutional for schools to derive monies from property taxes - property owners end up with all the burden for education and may derive zero benefits. Yet property tax is still the main driver for educational monies.

There are things about the property taxes that are off kilter to me. Different school districts put levies on the ballot, millage (percent of property evaluation) varies from district to district. An area without any significant industry (rural, farming communities) will typically have the highest millages. It gets wonky because individual communities put on different levies, but the State of Ohio collects the money and re-distributes it. The state then adds some touches like not returning funds or returning all funds if there are less than 300 students in a building. So people can be paying taxes into a system and then see the money go somewhere else.

Income taxes catch a greater segment of the population but just as not everyone owns property, not everyone has a taxable income.

Another downside to older people still paying taxes for a school system - some of their retirements are fixed, while the cost of school taxes keeps rising.

One more point about state funded education - for the people that dont pay in to the system, there is less motivation to get something out of the system (other than free babysitting and 2-3 free meals for their kids each day). It is a rare person that truly values what they don't work for.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-10-2013, 02:34 PM
LanceRocks's Avatar
LanceRocks (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Newport Beach, CA
Posts: 934
Thanks: 851
Thanks 357
Default

Originally Posted by Crump View Post
...I do believe state education should be paid for out of general taxation, and that it is fitting for childless people, those whose children have grown and businesses to make a contribution.
I agree completely - to me this is obvious on the face.

(Say...I'll send you six quid for the use of your WB moniker!)

: = ) Lance

Last edited by LanceRocks; 09-10-2013 at 02:41 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-10-2013, 02:35 PM
Crump's Avatar
Crump (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: London
Posts: 1,631
Thanks: 277
Thanks 254
Default

Originally Posted by Mohican View Post
I will still disagree. And may ask for you to define general taxation. Is this Property Tax, Income Tax, or a Consumption Tax.

In my state within the United States (Ohio) the Ohio Supreme Court had decreed some years ago that it was unconstitutional for schools to derive monies from property taxes - property owners end up with all the burden for education and may derive zero benefits. Yet property tax is still the main driver for educational monies.

There are things about the property taxes that are off kilter to me. Different school districts put levies on the ballot, millage (percent of property evaluation) varies from district to district. An area without any significant industry (rural, farming communities) will typically have the highest millages. It gets wonky because individual communities put on different levies, but the State of Ohio collects the money and re-distributes it. The state then adds some touches like not returning funds or returning all funds if there are less than 300 students in a building. So people can be paying taxes into a system and then see the money go somewhere else.

Income taxes catch a greater segment of the population but just as not everyone owns property, not everyone has a taxable income.

Another downside to older people still paying taxes for a school system - some of their retirements are fixed, while the cost of school taxes keeps rising.

One more point about state funded education - for the people that dont pay in to the system, there is less motivation to get something out of the system (other than free babysitting and 2-3 free meals for their kids each day). It is a rare person that truly values what they don't work for.
Ah yes, it's very easy to forget that terms which have a very specific meaning on one side of the Atlantic can be quite meaningless on the other.

In Britain we have very few hypothecated taxes, the Television Licence being perhaps the most notable, so, except for local Council Tax, most taxes end up in a single central government pot - General Taxation. The four biggest components of general taxation are income tax, VAT (a sort of purchase tax), national insurance (which has nothing to do with insurance and is effectively just a tax on employment) and corporation tax. Apart from corporation tax these are paid by nearly all workers and, in the case of VAT, by all consumers. What then is meant by general taxation is non-hypothecated tax derived from the broadest possible base. Where taxation is hypothecated there is much more likelihood of disputes about who should pay and who should benefit - general taxation avoids much of this.
__________________
Crump.

Our own right hand the chains must shiver.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-10-2013, 06:14 PM
bumhead's Avatar
bumhead (Offline)
Always Online
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: 1938
Posts: 2,214
Thanks: 5
Thanks 276
Default

Originally Posted by AnyaKimlun View Post
You're not giving any good reasons for it though. I get we need schools because we need somewhere for children to go free of charge whilst their parents work.

What I don't understand is why you think parents who can read, write and add up can't teach their children those basic skills along with potty training, sleeping, behaviour etc ?
I know why!

because for many parents (myself included), having their kids underfoot 24/7 would send us to the loony bin. I say that as a devoted and otherwise primary care giving parent, who relishes school holidays for the time it allows me to spend with them. a parent who was deeply committed to attachment parenting when they were younger, and did the hard yards that most don't (co-sleeping, baby wearing, minimum two years breastfeeding, etc etc). a parent who is now very supportive of, and committed to their common interest in academics. none of that changes the fact that all of us would go a bit nuts if we never had any alone time.

as regards the idea that any parent can home school based purely on the academics, I'd have to disagree. both my kids are well past my modest knowledge of maths, and the eldest has now outgunned me in English. there is NO way I could teach them at this point. I might have had a chance when they were say ... 6-10 years old, but not now.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-10-2013, 06:27 PM
bumhead's Avatar
bumhead (Offline)
Always Online
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: 1938
Posts: 2,214
Thanks: 5
Thanks 276
Default

meanwhile, the OP!

I'm with Crumples. bless public eduction, and all who support it. x 10.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-10-2013, 07:19 PM
tahdas
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I am opposed to public education for many reason and none of them have anything to do with taxes. Where should i starts? First lets look at what the world would be like without the PSS leviathan.

Not everyone would go to school, the rich would hire tutors and send their kids to boarding and private schools. What about the poor people they can't afford to do this?
Well ive brought three lovely boys into this world, who are state educated and are doing well. Those that argue children should not receive state education should ask a simple question...what if the family of the person who will discover the cure for cancer, cannot afford school. With no state education this bright little person cannot learn, grow and discover a love and aptitude for science etc. The same question can be applied to many other things. If only the top end of rich children go to school, we'll have a lot more David Camerons' and a lot less of those who do things out of love and compassion.
First off I'd bet my soul that a product of PSS would cure cancer. This kid could apply to a boarding school and get a scholar ship.

Their are plenty of ways to get financial aid. If a school likes you but you don't have the money to pay for it they will pay for you out of pocket if you they have to.

Take the college Tomas auquinas, a very very good college, if you get in, you're in, even if you can't afford it.

Im going to stop here.

Im sorry for somewhat badly written post. Unfortunatly all my computers with auctual keyboards are down some im stuck with my ipad.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-13-2013, 09:10 AM
Front&Centre's Avatar
Front&Centre (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: London
Posts: 1,289
Thanks: 201
Thanks 199
Default

It's the same reason it's ridiculous that tuition fees exist in the UK at all.
It it nothing more or less than a tax on the future of our country.
__________________
If trees could scream, would we be so quick to chop them down? We might, if they screamed all the time for no good reason.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-14-2013, 06:50 AM
tahdas
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Wait you do realize that school has little to do with education and every thing to do with socialization, indoctrination, and....sports. Someof these kid shouldn't have to go school all they wanna to do is play sports, there not readers, there not thinkers. If the had a choice they wouldn't go to school, of course their parent could force them to go.

That another issuse i have with schools, esspseacaly the one around me, they're all about sports. "We have baseball, golf wrestling, golf, hockey, etc."

Well what about your academics? You're a school after all.

Realy there are way to few schools that are about actual learning, there are some colleges though.

So dont say that bullshit about edacating our children. Allot of people aren't ment to be famous or smart, auctauly most people are just meant to be blue color workers. You don't need education to do that.

Written on my ipad
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-14-2013, 07:43 AM
declan molloy's Avatar
declan molloy (Offline)
Abnormally Articulate
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Irish Midlands
Posts: 127
Thanks: 37
Thanks 20
Default

I told my children when they were young to listen to their teachers but spend some time looking out the window too.
I never engaged well with the formalisation of the education system in my country but always had a love of learning.
I was even chastised in school one day for drawing sketches in one of my books of the opposing thumb in primates!
Anyway my formal education stopped at 15 and I have played catch up ever since
I think children should be assessed earlier (in a gentle non envasive way) to look for special talents such as an enquiring mind or interest in science or nature.
Sadly we live in a society where city banker or athlete is the hero and the science geek.....well he or she is a science geek.....sad

"Nostalgia aint what it used to be"
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-14-2013, 06:11 PM
Front&Centre's Avatar
Front&Centre (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: London
Posts: 1,289
Thanks: 201
Thanks 199
Default

there not readers, there not thinkers.
esspseacaly
Realy there are way to few
Allot of people aren't ment
auctauly
blue color workers
Yeah, school isn't important.
It's not like it's where you learn basic spelling techniques or anything.
I would also like to say that the idea that 'most schools aren't focussed on learning' is utterly unfounded.
I mean...
What... where did you even get that idea?
__________________
If trees could scream, would we be so quick to chop them down? We might, if they screamed all the time for no good reason.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-14-2013, 10:39 PM
tahdas
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

You know i can blame bad spelling on a number of things, the fact that im writing on a tablet, the fact that im not taking the time to double check my spelling. Your arguments are asinine.

Ha ha! Your joking right? Oh right you went to public school. No wonder you don't get it. I may be somewhat ignorant, but at least im not an indoctrinated fool, thinking, the government should pay for my edacation. Ha!

We've battled communists all these years, yet we didnt even come close to destroying it, hell none of us even knew what communism was. All we knew was that it was evil and we had to kill it. Bang bang. While the real threat was planted in our brains, through movies and schools and what have. Now we all accept it, because we were taught to.

Im sure i won't make difference, i won't change how you think. We're doomed, going to he'll and we don't even know it.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-14-2013, 10:51 PM
tahdas
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Have you read any of these text books that ourkids are fed? Have even talked to your average high schooler? Blindly following Obama or whatever person they're told to. It's like in north Korrea,"lets read the speech of dear leader"
We're getting there.

God! What can i say? No matter what i say I'll be wrong. What do they always saying in schools?... Oh that's right! Have open mind.

Go ahead say im wrong! Wait does such a thing even exist? Or is right and wrong whatever you want it to be.

Damn it! im ranting.

Anyway ill stop here, I'll stop waisting my time and yours.

We're already doomed, why do i even bother?
Reply With Quote
Reply

  WritersBeat.com > General Discussion > Writers' Cafe


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Practically Invisible ... Not if I can help it. Practicallyinvisible Introductions 6 12-16-2005 04:15 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:18 AM.

vBulletin, Copyright 2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.