Jump to content



Welcome to KnowledgeSutra - Dear Guest , Please Register here to get Your own website. - Ask a Question / Express Opinion / Reply w/o Sign-Up!
Photo
- - - - -

Public Education / Welfare System


11 replies to this topic

#1 Causative

Causative

    Newbie

  • Kontributors
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 26 August 2010 - 06:57 PM

Lately I have heard a lot of noise on how expensive education is, probably because I live so close to Berkley. I have also heard a lot of people complaining about how much money is being spent on welfare. So, would it not be cost effective for the government to setup servers where people can go and get at least a bachelors degree online and testing is conducted at public libraries or state universities with a proctor. It would also be advantageous to have anyone who receives government assistance to go through a Myers Briggs personality test to help the welfare recipient find a career that would best suit them. I mean isn't someone with bachelors degree more likely to get hired for a job, and also get paid more? If people who fail to take or pass classes while on welfare the checks they receive are less, which would motivate them to study and understand the coarse material. Also have the people who have passed a class work as tutors if needed to those who need help with coarse material. Now I am sure I am not the first to come up with this idea and I know many of people out on the internet can criticize this idea, so I welcome that, I also welcome the more intelligent of you to add to this idea as to what would be needed to make this succeed.
  • 0

#2 zanzibarjones

zanzibarjones

    Advanced Member

  • Kontributors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 130 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX
  • Interests:Computers, Fishing, Art, Music, Metal Detecting, my kids and family...
  • myCENT:6.34

Posted 27 August 2010 - 03:06 PM

Well there are 2 schools of thought on this kind of thing.
1) Welfare fuels a bad economy
2) Lack of education fuels unemployment

But saying that you need a college degree to get a good job, well... that's not exactly true. Work experience can sometimes, and most often is substituted for book knowledge or a degree.

People of welfare are there for a reason. They don't want to work. Quite frankly, if you want to work, you go get a job. If you do not want to work, you go on welfare, at least that's the way it is in most major cities in US.

Although setting up those work centers is a great idea, they have done it, and some, only some people take advantage of it. I mean let's get real here. If you have been living on welfare for any length of time, you realize, that you can get, housing, food, clothing and insurance all on the taxpayers dime. What's the point of working, if you can get by, by not working.

It comes down to morals and standards. If you really want to work, you get your butt up and go fill out an application. Simple as that.
  • 0

#3 sheepdog

sheepdog

    Trap Double Mocha Member

  • Kontributors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,209 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Missouri
  • myCENT:58.47

Posted 09 September 2010 - 02:08 AM

I think you may be on to something. I personally don't think anybody should get a hand out for nothing. I believe to get their welfare checks they should have to preform some sort of community service, or as you brought up, get some education. Education may be a good thing, in the event they couldn't get a job because of their lack of education. Giving them an education may help them get off welfare, so might be worth the effort. Of course, it would have to be carefully set up, otherwise welfare bums would just become full time students and never stop sucking the rest of us dry by continueing taking class after class after class, just to keep the welfare checks coming, just like they have baby after baby to get bigger checks now. Unfortunatly, there are just some lazy good for nothing bums out there that have no intention of working for a living. In some ways forced community service might be better, since they would not be able to sit around and do drugs and drink beer and would actually have to show up to work.
  • 0

#4 sheepdog

sheepdog

    Trap Double Mocha Member

  • Kontributors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,209 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Missouri
  • myCENT:58.47

Posted 30 September 2010 - 01:57 AM

I won't critisize you one little bit. I have long believed that people should have to do something to earn their welfare checks. It does no one any good to just be given a free handout for nothing in return. Education may be a good choise, and I like your idea of cutting their checks if they don't try to apply themselves. zanzibarjones has it absolutly right, people are on welfare because they are too lazy to work. And they aren't going to get up off their lazy asses unless they are forced to. I also think some sort of required community service type work would also be helpful. An education is not going to help everyone. Not everyone wants one, and truth be told, somebody has to flip the burgers at McDonalds. Welfare reciepients could do community service at schools, civic centers, or any charitable organizations. There should be no slack for the whinny ones that claim they are unable to work for various physical reasons. There is some job that everybody can do. Even a 400lb fat *bottom* that can't walk can sit and answer the telephone at some organization. It's easy, no contributions, no welfare check. See how easy it is to solve problems when you aren't a whinny *bottom* liberal?
  • 0

#5 networker

networker

    Privileged Member

  • Kontributors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 661 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • myCENT:35.34

Posted 25 October 2010 - 08:38 PM

It would definitely be a good idea to make some aspects of Education free.
Those where instructors aren't necessarily needed and one could do all the studying,
and downloading of study documents online.

I think if people had this opportunity then many would take advantage of it.
Myself, I wouldn't want to get in debt for going to school again. I was in debt for years
because of a student loan and certainly don't need that feeling again.
Been there, done that.

Free education I would definitely consider though.
  • 0

#6 AzureMusique

AzureMusique

    Newbie [Level 1]

  • Kontributors
  • Pip
  • 24 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:When human souls finally reach an understanding of kindness, that's where I'll be
  • Interests:Violinist/Violist. some piano. Knitting. Math (is fascinating), astronomy, astrology, numerology, swimming, tennis, yoga, archery, and computer and console games, one of which included pokemon
  • myCENT:46.03

Posted 15 November 2010 - 04:45 AM

Some people are on welfare for a reason, such as aspiring artists, actors/actresses and writers. One famous author, JK Rowling, who wrote the Harry Potter series, was on welfare at the time of writing a her first book while raising her first child. A full-time job would leave her probably almost no time to write, as it was the case while she taught somewhere in Spain and Portugal, and schedules of part-time jobs can sometimes be unpredictable, depending on the line of work. She was lucky enough that her books hit the jackpot after searching for a publisher for some couple of years.

Our only problem is how some people abuse the welfare system, even though they have jobs, PAYING jobs.

Disability payments, whether it'll be physically or a learning disability such as all spectrums of autism, Asperger's Syndrome, ADD, and possibly ADHD, or a mental disability such as PTSD, is a totally different topic.

Yes, increasing expenses to education is a very big problem. Perhaps, this might be the fact some people are unable to afford education and are kept on welfare because of it, while they are unable to find jobs according to their degree level. At my school, CSU Chico, there's been talk of accepting applications at only neighboring counties surrounding Butte County. Whether if it's just freshman or transfer, I'm not sure. What's even more disturbing is that they've just decided to raise 5% in tuition.

My main concern that fuels this problem is how the upper class income-earners are paying less taxes and evading more thrown at them; this cuts at not just education, but other public services as well. San Francisco is just fortunate it has a running, if just barely, transportation system.
  • 0

#7 sheepdog

sheepdog

    Trap Double Mocha Member

  • Kontributors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,209 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Missouri
  • myCENT:58.47

Posted 22 November 2010 - 05:35 PM

"Some people are on welfare for a reason, such as aspiring artists, actors/actresses and writers"

I don't believe this is a valid reason to be on welfare. How many thosands of "aspiring" artists just have this dream of making it to the big time, when in fact, they are talentless hacks and will never amount to anything. That would be like saying it was a persons dream to buy a big winning lottery ticket so they made it to the big time, and we should support them with welfare so they could spend all their money on lottery tickets until they got that big winner. Sure, The Harry Potter author did eventually make it big, but how many people ever really make it to the top? I'd say very few actually do it compared to many thousands of dreamers.

As for being on welfare so you have time to write, paint, whatever, if you are truely passionate about writing/painting, you will find the time needed to do it. If you can't, you probably aren't all that serious about it and aren't that good anyway. A person just needs a little inspiration and a lot of ambition. You are unlikely to have much ambition when your sitting around collecting a check for doing nothing.
  • 0

#8 SujitTyagi

SujitTyagi

    Newbie

  • Kontributors
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 17 June 2011 - 06:26 AM

The critical aspect of Indian public education system is its low quality. Lack of education creates illiteracy and affects country growth. The traditional quality of teaching they receive is extremely insufficient in government schools. A common issue in all government school is the poor quality of education, with weak infrastructure and inadequate skills. The Microsoft Project Shiksha program focused on retaining the child’s interest towards studies and pulls them back to the classrooms. The objective of campaign is to set up the infrastructure for the state governments for training teachers and spread awareness about the program. These also help teachers to educate students and make studies more interactive.
  • 0

#9 loremar

loremar

    Newbie

  • Kontributors
  • Pip
  • 6 posts

Posted 26 June 2011 - 03:26 PM

Both public education and welfare system is a huge huge problem back in our country, the Philippines. The culprit is overpopulation. That's why despite a conservative country, legislators are already discussing about population control and now they're planning to pass reproductive health bill to giveaway free contraceptives. I'm just getting confused what's more expensive? providing contraceptives for everyone or funding on more schools and social service. Schools are anyway not disposable and can be used for generations unlike contraceptives that you just throw away after a lustful encounter.
  • 0

#10 sheepdog

sheepdog

    Trap Double Mocha Member

  • Kontributors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,209 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Missouri
  • myCENT:58.47

Posted 02 July 2011 - 06:08 PM

Sorry to hear your government is taking such drastic measues at to making reproductive laws. Just handing out contraceptives isn't that bad though if that is all they are doing. Contraceptives are VERY inexpensivem they can't even compare with putting a child threw the educational system, no matter how good or bad that system happend to be.

I often wonder why the government screws up everything it trys to do. So much waste, fraud, and other failures, it seems to be that the government fails everything it attempts.
  • 0

#11 iAssistant

iAssistant

    Advanced Member

  • Kontributors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 116 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 11 August 2011 - 09:09 AM

For me, what the government should do is to change the curriculum in school because there are many obsolete books and subjects that is not necessary and applicable today. Shorten the year, I don't believe that the longer year you study in school will make you better. This way, we can save money. Be strict, if they don't learn, don't pass them so they are not wasting time and money.

For students if they want to study, they should study hard.

For the parents, they should be responsible in their children's education and do not blame the government all the time, they should guide their children so they are sure that they are not wasting their money on education. And yes, I agree to our friend there that having a good education is not a guarantee that you will get a good job, basic education is enough and it is up to you how you will nurture what you learn and take advantage of it.
  • 0

#12 sheepdog

sheepdog

    Trap Double Mocha Member

  • Kontributors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,209 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Missouri
  • myCENT:58.47

Posted 30 August 2011 - 02:39 PM

I certainly agree with you that a curriculum change is definalty in order. However, getting people to agree to what changes are made is always a huge problem. There seems to be a big push for classes that I personally consider a huge waste of time. Take for example, our own local school district. It had an industrial sewing class in conjunction with a local garment factory, however the program with cut so they could better fund their sports department with more coaches. Now tell me in the real world, how many people are going to go on to become professional athletes, compared to the number that are going to end up working in a factory? Why on earth would you not want to expose the kids to what is going on in the real world, not some imaginary rosy perfect world? The same holds true for many other things that children should be taught at school. Things that would actually help them during their lives. I think they should spend a lot more time teaching them the proper way to write a check and balance their check books. And it should be explained to them just exactly how much that pretty sweater is really going to cost them when they purchase it with a credit card and pay 30% interest on that credit card.

Your idea on being strict and not passing the children if they don't learn is right on! So many kids get flushed threw the system and passed on when they aren't learning a bloody thing, just because it might damage their poor little ego's to be flunked. All this does is set up bad habits for their future, why put forth any effort when you get want ever you want handed to you for doing nothing? I say flunk 'em if they don't learn. Keep them in whatever grade they are in until they learn. If teachers are paying attention, they should realize that certain students need additional help. There is no excuse for missing it. And no excuse for letting it slide without doing something about it. And it should have to cost a fortune of taxpayers money to fix the problem. Have some of the brighter student tutor the slower ones. Give the bright ones exta credit for helping.

And believe it or not, (bet you thought you'd never hear me say this) your right about not blaming the government. The parents should be aware of what is going on in their schools, and take a vocal and active part in the curriculum and everything that is being taught to their children. Don't just hand off your kids to the government and expect them to do all the work. Because quite frankly, the government is not capable of raising children.
  • 0



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users