Just now, Boogyman said:

"Pay for it yourself". Well, besides that huge property tax bill you pay for your entire life. Pay for it a second time.

If I had children, they'd be in private school. Because I'm not poor. But even I see the value in teaching history, science and literature to all students. It's just asinine to suggest otherwise. 

Just now, vikas83 said:

If I had children, they'd be in private school. Because I'm not poor. But even I see the value in teaching history, science and literature to all students. It's just asinine to suggest otherwise. 

Also, children taught music do better in other subjects. It teaches good habits.

1 minute ago, vikas83 said:

If I had children, they'd be in private school. Because I'm not poor. But even I see the value in teaching history, science and literature to all students. It's just asinine to suggest otherwise. 

Oh I agree. But saying "pay for it" doesn't make sense when we literally do pay for it. 

Also, imagine how many brilliant kids would fall through the cracks under this idiotic idea just because their parents may be poor or working class people who couldn't afford private school. Our society couldn't afford those kinds of loses IMO.

4 minutes ago, Toastrel said:

Also, children taught music do better in other subjects. It teaches good habits.

I agree that music is helpful, and I studied it. But if funding is tight, I'd rather cut that than science. Ideally you'd offer music, band, art, etc.

4 minutes ago, Toastrel said:

Also, children taught music do better in other subjects. It teaches good habits.

Same with sports or other extracurricular activities. They all teach the value of practice and putting time and work into something.

8 minutes ago, Toastrel said:

There are people here who want schools to teach kids to count and read - and basically stop teaching them at 10.

What's the plan then? Other than harvesting them for their organs?

16 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

Let me rephrase.  I'd prefer our country not be filled with morons who have no base knowledge of science, history or literature, not to mention even more practical skills like typing, computers, etc.  What exactly do you think would be gained by cutting out important core curriculum like that?

And your way is obviously doing so much better on that front /sarcasm

Just now, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

And your way is obviously doing so much better on that front /sarcasm

Compared to your suggestion of flat-out not teaching them those things?  Yes, obviously it is.

Just now, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

And your way is obviously doing so much better on that front /sarcasm

So obviously the only way to fix these deficiencies is to completely stop teaching them /sarcasm.

3 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

Oh I agree. But saying "pay for it" doesn't make sense when we literally do pay for it. 

Also, imagine how many brilliant kids would fall through the cracks under this idiotic idea just because their parents may be poor or working class people who couldn't afford private school. Our society couldn't afford those kinds of loses IMO.

I’m attempting to imagine how many right now and I’m finding it difficult to imagine that it would be any more than we already have right now

Just now, Boogyman said:

So obviously the only way to fix these deficiencies is to completely stop teaching them /sarcasm.

Correction.  There is no way to fix the deficiencies so we needn’t bother wasting money and time trying

There’s basically two things you need in order to learn practically anything you want on the internet or to enroll in college if you want

Grammar, what you need to read

Math

2 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

I’m attempting to imagine how many right now and I’m finding it difficult to imagine that it would be any more than we already have right now

Correction.  There is no way to fix the deficiencies so we needn’t bother wasting money and time trying

You're just wrong and for some reason dug in on this.  Plenty of kids in America go on to utilize their knowledge of Science, history or literature in meaningful ways.  If we stop teaching those things, we can pretty much guarantee that society will be worse off for it.

6 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

I’m attempting to imagine how many right now and I’m finding it difficult to imagine that it would be any more than we already have right now

Correction.  There is no way to fix the deficiencies so we needn’t bother wasting money and time trying

Dim people have poor imaginations.

 

Both my kids excell in STEM and go to public school. So speak for your own stupid, incapable children.

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

You're just wrong and for some reason dug in on this.  Plenty of kids in America go on to utilize their knowledge of Science, history or literature in meaningful ways.  If we stop teaching those things, we can pretty much guarantee that society will be worse off for it.

And I say those that did would have learned it anyway absent government subsidy

Just now, Boogyman said:

Dim people have poor imaginations.

 

Both my kids excell in STEM and go to public school. So speak for your own stupid, incapable children.

Nothing against your kids, but I’d say that with the money we could save you in property tax you’d be able to afford a private school where theydve done better

1 minute ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

And I say those that did would have learned it anyway absent government subsidy

You don't have kids, do you?

Just now, Boogyman said:

You don't have kids, do you?

No but if I can afford the time home schooling sounds better to me than public school

Just now, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

Nothing against your kids, but I’d say that with the money we could save you in property tax you’d be able to afford a private school where theydve done better

I can offord it now, I just prefer public school.

And if I had lower income they would be stuck in your school of idiots, possible wasting the potential they have.

Just now, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

No but if I can afford the time home schooling sounds better to me than public school

This explains you not understanding children and why you are stuck on this really bad idea.

Just now, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

No but if I can afford the time home schooling sounds better to me than public school

I knew it.  Sit down dude.  You have no idea what you're talking about.

1 minute ago, Boogyman said:

I can offord it now, I just prefer public school.

And if I had lower income they would be stuck in your school of idiots, possible wasting the potential they have.

Grammar and math, taken to the highest level, are serious subjects

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

I knew it.  Sit down dude.  You have no idea what you're talking about.

Look the problem ain’t gonna be that I’m wrong, the problems going to be that my girlfriend will never agree

1 minute ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

Grammar and math, taken to the highest level, are serious subjects

Ok?

Just now, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

Look the problem ain’t gonna be that I’m wrong, the problems going to be that my girlfriend will never agree

To have sex with you?

4 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

Ok?

So never mind all this other stuff, teach the crap out of English and Math, have kids doing Complex Number Analysis by 8th grade and philosophy of language

if they want to know how humans arrived at this point in history go to college

Also, your "plan" isn't saving anyone anything on property taxes.  Teaching less subjects in the same amount of time saves very little and kids still need to go to school until around 3PM, because parents specifically work around that time.  If you teach kids for 4 hours a day, you'd save money, but you'd create an even lazier group of kids with nothing to do all day and a bunch of parents that can't afford childcare.  So your plan would have to be just teaching kids math and grammar for a full day, which is an enormous waste of time when there are other important skills that they could be learning.