Should School Attendance be Compulsory?

[Internationalist Bastard]

Did nobody else heavily socialize as a kid outside of school?

I did, but really only with friends I met at school.

Huh, a lot of people I've met say that, guess I was the odd one

[Thermodolia]

Ya no I don't want children to get fucked over and be homeschooled because mommy and daddy think the government is going to indoctrinate their kids

Homeschooled kids are by most metrics better educated than their peers in public schools. I don't really see how it's any sort of disservice.

You have no idea what it's like to be home schooled do you? I've suffered though the horrors that was home schooling, it's awful and doesn't help the kid.

[Neutraligon]

Homeschooled will most likely keep them from gaining any real social interaction.

Did nobody else heavily socialize as a kid outside of school?

It can be harder to meet people if you do not have a school. One of the things schools do is allow different kids a place where they can meet and become friends at which point they can then socialize outside of school. Did I play with people on a playground, sure, but rarely did I meet those kids again.

[Jankau-Helmutsberg]

Compulsory? Yes. Rigorously enforced? Nah.

[Thermodolia]

Homeschooled kids are by most metrics better educated than their peers in public schools. I don't really see how it's any sort of disservice.

I don't imagine many parents are up to the task of teaching all the important subjects

Or if those kids need special education needs. I have dyslexia for several years until I went to a private school my parents just thought I was being lazy when I couldn't spell or read a that great

[San Lumen]

Compulsory? Yes. Rigorously enforced? Nah.

How can something by compulsory and not rigorously enforced?

[Internationalist Bastard]

Did nobody else heavily socialize as a kid outside of school?

It can be harder to meet people if you do not have a school. One of the things schools do is allow different kids a place where they can meet and become friends at which point they can then socialize outside of school. Did I play with people on a playground, sure, but rarely did I meet those kids again.

Huh, I wandered around a lot as a kid, so I made a lot of friends, looking back on it, I could've been more careful.

[Bressen]

VAT/consumption tax is pretty nice. Any method of taxation that doesn't result in people being extorted/threatened with being thrown into a cage is fine by me.

Attempted VAT/consumption tax evasion would, y'know, result in people being extorted/threatened with being thrown into a cage.

The difference is fairly meaningless.
This would still hit the poor the hardest, since the poor have to spend a much greater portion of their total income, and have little in savings. Meanwhile, the wealthy typically spend a very small proportion of their income and are usually able to amass further wealth in this manner with relative ease.

How do you justify this disparity?

You can't evade VAT/consumption tax. It's calculated onto a product before you voluntarily purchase it.

I don't need to justify the disparity; there's nothing wrong with some people having more money than others.

VAT/consumption tax is pretty nice. Any method of taxation that doesn't result in people being extorted/threatened with being thrown into a cage is fine by me.

So a sales tax.
You do realize that sales taxes are regressive, right?

Yeah.

What on Earth are you talking about? Education should be a choice because it only impacts the person who's choosing not to get an education.

And no, that's not what my logic entails at all. You can't speed down a highway because you're likely to end up hitting someone; you have your choice of how fast you can drive limited by the law so you don't infringe on someone else by ramming into them at 100mph.

1. but you said before its not the governments job to regulate that just like education.

VAT/consumption tax is pretty nice. Any method of taxation that doesn't result in people being extorted/threatened with being thrown into a cage is fine by me.

2. And taxation is extortion? Last time i checked extortion is a crime. and 3. with a consumption tax you want to pay more money for everything you buy?

1. No, I just said that the government doesn't need to exist for roads to exist.
2. Yeah, it is.
3. Yup, because I can choose to buy something - I'd voluntarily be submitting myself to being taxed, unlike under the income tax where the government takes a slice as and when they please.

I think it's stupid because you're willingly giving someone your money who, if you didn't give them money, would throw you in a cage. You're allowing this evil middleman to exist, when you yourself could be a shining example and instead donate your money to people who need it directly.

Well unlike in the US, where citizens have to self-assess, self-declare and physically pay their taxes, we in the UK have our taxes automatically deducted by the government. So, evading paying income tax is about as feasible as evading paying the VAT/consumption taxes you propose in its place.

So why are you so fixated on this notion of "giving the government money" else being "thrown in a cage"?
We don't need to.

All you're demonstrating is that the UK government is an effective and sly beast when it comes to getting money; they're extorting you via income tax with no way for you to not pay it. However, income tax generally isn't conducted in the way that the UK does it, and my example of the threat of being thrown in a cage applies to America, as you so kindly explained their tax system is different from the UKs.

[Thermodolia]

Homeschooled will most likely keep them from gaining any real social interaction.

Did nobody else heavily socialize as a kid outside of school?

I did, but only because most of middle and elementary school I was homeschooled. I had to literally beg my parents to send me out to school. Found out later that my mom had a terrible time at school and foisted her fears on to us.

[Bressen]

It's a matter of parental responsibility, and I'll admit that it sucks, but the government (generally speaking) shouldn't be getting involved in family relationships. Some people aren't cut out to be parents, and I think the parents that refuse to send their children to school are likely going to be causing more severe issues to their children, such as parental neglect. However, the number of these types of parents is so low to begin with.

The correct course of action is to then negotiate with the parent, and hope they can see reason, not lock them up or impose a fine on them.

And what if they don't? just say fine its your choice?

Well, it'd be heavily dependent on what the parents reasons are, and you could quite easily make them see sense. However, if they didn't, you'd be best off involving social services.

This is a very fringe example though, since most parents would and do happily let their child go to school.

[Internationalist Bastard]

I don't imagine many parents are up to the task of teaching all the important subjects

Or if those kids need special education needs. I have dyslexia for several years until I went to a private school my parents just thought I was being lazy when I couldn't spell or read a that great

Or in my case, my deeply Catholic nan teaching sex ed, no way that'd turn out well

[Jankau-Helmutsberg]

Compulsory? Yes. Rigorously enforced? Nah.

How can something by compulsory and not rigorously enforced?

Just like pot laws are not enforced in many countries or regions. The amount of attendance should be decided by parents. If one can pass the final exam, I wouldn't really care about the attendance rate.

[Internationalist Bastard]

Did nobody else heavily socialize as a kid outside of school?

I did, but only because my parents where nuts

Hover parents?

[Valgora]

Attempted VAT/consumption tax evasion would, y'know, result in people being extorted/threatened with being thrown into a cage.

The difference is fairly meaningless.
This would still hit the poor the hardest, since the poor have to spend a much greater portion of their total income, and have little in savings. Meanwhile, the wealthy typically spend a very small proportion of their income and are usually able to amass further wealth in this manner with relative ease.

How do you justify this disparity?

You can't evade VAT/consumption tax. It's calculated onto a product before you voluntarily purchase it.

I don't need to justify the disparity; there's nothing wrong with some people having more money than others.

So a sales tax.
You do realize that sales taxes are regressive, right?

Yeah.

So your logic is basically "Fuck the poor. Fuck anyone who doesn't have shittons of money. I want y'all to be hit the hardest by taxes while the rich just get off easy".

[Diopolis]

Homeschooled kids are by most metrics better educated than their peers in public schools. I don't really see how it's any sort of disservice.

I don't imagine many parents are up to the task of teaching all the important subjects

Homeschooled kids are by most metrics better educated than their peers in public schools. I don't really see how it's any sort of disservice.

Homeschooled will most likely keep them from gaining any real social interaction.

Both of these posts betray a lack of knowledge about how homeschooling actually works. Yes, most homeschooled kids are a little eccentric, but that's not from lack of social interaction- given who chooses to homeschool(religious fanatics and bohemians are not known for their normality), the kids would be like that anyway.
And most homeschooling parents don't insist on teaching every subject themselves. Some run cooperative ventures where the kids go to one day a week for instruction and get the rest as homework. Others swap kids for the day- if Mrs. Smith is good at math, and Mrs. Jones speaks Spanish, why shouldn't they cooperate and get a day off out of the deal? Other, wealthier homeschoolers just hire professional tutors to ensure the necessary instruction is given.

[Thermodolia]

Or if those kids need special education needs. I have dyslexia for several years until I went to a private school my parents just thought I was being lazy when I couldn't spell or read a that great

Or in my case, my deeply Catholic nan teaching sex ed, no way that'd turn out well

Now it all makes sense

[Internationalist Bastard]

I don't imagine many parents are up to the task of teaching all the important subjects

Homeschooled will most likely keep them from gaining any real social interaction.

Both of these posts betray a lack of knowledge about how homeschooling actually works. Yes, most homeschooled kids are a little eccentric, but that's not from lack of social interaction- given who chooses to homeschool(religious fanatics and bohemians are not known for their normality), the kids would be like that anyway.
And most homeschooling parents don't insist on teaching every subject themselves. Some run cooperative ventures where the kids go to one day a week for instruction and get the rest as homework. Others swap kids for the day- if Mrs. Smith is good at math, and Mrs. Jones speaks Spanish, why shouldn't they cooperate and get a day off out of the deal? Other, wealthier homeschoolers just hire professional tutors to ensure the necessary instruction is given.

I guess that's fair, but I'd rather send my kid to an actual school

[Zozon]

Not only should school be compulsory, there should be certain topics and subjects that are compulsory: from 1st grade to Ph.D should be classes taught on philosophy, arguments, fallacies, and theories. Critical thinking before all else. A smarter world is a better world. A lot of problems we have today wouldn't exist to nearly the extent they do if ignorance wasn't so prevalent. The curriculum should also make active efforts apply these same theories to tear apart apologetic arguments for religion. This part of the curriculum would be one of the few parts implemented for all 20+ years of schooling. A lot doesn't get done because of religion, and it's a toxic influence on society. The worst part is that the hindrance is based on faulty logic.

Example A: Bob lives in a religious country. Tom lives in a secular country. Now, for the sake of argument let's assume these two countries hate each other and have embargoes placed on each other. Bob gets an infection. Bob loses a limb. Because that miracle scientist who would have made breakthroughs in stem cell research allowing bob to replace his limb was born in Bob's country, he (the miracle scientist) doesn't exist, and instead is a preacher. Therefore Bob walks around the rest of his working life with crutches, and because of the distrust in science in Bob's society he barely gets adequate treatment for his condition. He might as well have a prescription of prayer. Tom too gets an infection and loses a limb. But because Tom's country actually cares about science he has the medicine he needs to keep the pain away, in the meantime his country's scientists are working on stem cell research for a cure, which, for all we know, only didn't exist at that point because Bob's sh*tty country believed in false ideas based on ignorance, so now the weight of that research falls on the shoulders of the secular country's scientists.


You can argue that most likely the two countries won't be embargoed and bob could get the medicine he needs. But that's only because the secular country had come up with the medicine. If it wasn't for the secular country bob would be screwed. Instead of relying on secular societies to advance humanity, why not have all countries be secular, creating situations where those who would otherwise pray all day end up working in a field of science and adding to the brainpower of the international scientific community.

And do you know what can help with that? Good schooling. And you won't get there as quickly if some people are sitting around at home all day eating Doritos and reading hentai. Start small, train teachers to a certain standard. and then have those teachers train other teachers. Network to upgrade the quality of all the schools, if it's possible make quality teaching cheaper, and make up for lower pay with incentives and benefits that no one else gets to enjoy. Halve classroom sizes with this new army of qualified teachers by expanding the network and building far more schools and universities. Have enough classrooms while having smaller student bodies so that there's always enough available classes for anyone to attend. Wait-lists for classes need to become a thing of the past. Make sure there are enough schools that everyone can get an education while still only being in a student body of no more than 1,000 at the high school level. No more than, say, 5,000 for Universities. or however many students they need to keep costs below $500 a semester. They can fight the resulting rising costs of tuition by having smaller campuses with enough classrooms for everyone, and by having every other school offering the same thing. The university campus sizes will have limits as well, with the state subsidizing any need for facilities or extra space that would improve the quality of education.

All this, mandatory.

Every classroom must also have at least a TA:Student ratio of 3:1. so in a classroom of 15 students you have 5 TAs, who specialize in accommodating and adapting to students' different learning styles. How do you pay for this? Well, for one, in the US's case, federal funding. Two, also in the case of the US, cut spending on the military. Imagine if $800 billion somehow found its way into education and science. For damn sure these kinds of solutions would be a little more obvious to the politicians we have now, who would have been educated on a $800 billion budget.

[Internationalist Bastard]

Or in my case, my deeply Catholic nan teaching sex ed, no way that'd turn out well

Now it all makes sense

What why I'm so lewd?

[Imperializt Russia]

Attempted VAT/consumption tax evasion would, y'know, result in people being extorted/threatened with being thrown into a cage.

The difference is fairly meaningless.
This would still hit the poor the hardest, since the poor have to spend a much greater portion of their total income, and have little in savings. Meanwhile, the wealthy typically spend a very small proportion of their income and are usually able to amass further wealth in this manner with relative ease.

How do you justify this disparity?

You can't evade VAT/consumption tax. It's calculated onto a product before you voluntarily purchase it.

I don't need to justify the disparity; there's nothing wrong with some people having more money than others.

I never claimed it was. My point was that the tax burden under this system hits the poor the hardest. Do you think that is fair?

Well unlike in the US, where citizens have to self-assess, self-declare and physically pay their taxes, we in the UK have our taxes automatically deducted by the government. So, evading paying income tax is about as feasible as evading paying the VAT/consumption taxes you propose in its place.

So why are you so fixated on this notion of "giving the government money" else being "thrown in a cage"?
We don't need to.

All you're demonstrating is that the UK government is an effective and sly beast when it comes to getting money; they're extorting you via income tax with no way for you to not pay it. However, income tax generally isn't conducted in the way that the UK does it, and my example of the threat of being thrown in a cage applies to America, as you so kindly explained their tax system is different from the UKs.

And yet, your system is, by the same metric, "an effective and sly beast when it comes to getting money; they're extorting you via income sales tax with no way for you to not pay it."

[Bressen]

You can't evade VAT/consumption tax. It's calculated onto a product before you voluntarily purchase it.

I don't need to justify the disparity; there's nothing wrong with some people having more money than others.


Yeah.

So your logic is basically "Fuck the poor. Fuck anyone who doesn't have shittons of money. I want y'all to be hit the hardest by taxes while the rich just get off easy".

Not really. It'd be quite feasible to have a welfare system that operates on removing VAT from goods if you're household is below a certain income level. Just have a card that you scan and the VAT you would be paying is given back to you in cash or credit.

Or the poor people could just live within their means and buy cheaper goods. Being honest, all they really need to buy is cheap food and clothing to get by, and the tax of 20% on a 35p tin of beans is only gonna up the price by a marginal 7p.

[Thermodolia]

I did, but only because my parents where nuts

Hover parents?

Not exactly. My mom had a terrible time at school when she was young and foisted her fears on to us. I literally had to beg to go out to school, because I wanted to be with all my friends. Interestingly enough only one or two of my siblings would consider homeschooling their kids. The rest have said no fucking way

[Diopolis]

Both of these posts betray a lack of knowledge about how homeschooling actually works. Yes, most homeschooled kids are a little eccentric, but that's not from lack of social interaction- given who chooses to homeschool(religious fanatics and bohemians are not known for their normality), the kids would be like that anyway.
And most homeschooling parents don't insist on teaching every subject themselves. Some run cooperative ventures where the kids go to one day a week for instruction and get the rest as homework. Others swap kids for the day- if Mrs. Smith is good at math, and Mrs. Jones speaks Spanish, why shouldn't they cooperate and get a day off out of the deal? Other, wealthier homeschoolers just hire professional tutors to ensure the necessary instruction is given.

I guess that's fair, but I'd rather send my kid to an actual school

And that's your choice to make.

[Thermodolia]

Now it all makes sense

What why I'm so lewd?

Yes...

[Thermodolia]

I don't imagine many parents are up to the task of teaching all the important subjects

Homeschooled will most likely keep them from gaining any real social interaction.

Both of these posts betray a lack of knowledge about how homeschooling actually works. Yes, most homeschooled kids are a little eccentric, but that's not from lack of social interaction- given who chooses to homeschool(religious fanatics and bohemians are not known for their normality), the kids would be like that anyway.
And most homeschooling parents don't insist on teaching every subject themselves. Some run cooperative ventures where the kids go to one day a week for instruction and get the rest as homework. Others swap kids for the day- if Mrs. Smith is good at math, and Mrs. Jones speaks Spanish, why shouldn't they cooperate and get a day off out of the deal? Other, wealthier homeschoolers just hire professional tutors to ensure the necessary instruction is given.

Yet none of them actually ask the kids if they want it, they just go with it