> Somehow people managed before we had school lunches. If parents neglect their children to the point that they become malnourished, there is a system in place to remove those children from their parents.
<br>
<br>I'll argue again that this is a completely moot point for most school districts. Go to a school board meeting. Seriously.
<br>
<br>But also, removing lunches just shifts burden from the schools back to the parents. Which is OK I guess, if your argument is that citizens without children are shouldering too much of the costs.
<br>
<br>>
<br>> > Your plan: expulsion used regularily
<br>> > Result of your plan: Millions of kids getting expelled, leading to a large population of uneducated violant kids who grow up to be violant criminals.
<br>>
<br>> Many of whom may become violent criminals <b>even if they stay in school</b>. You're also completely ignoring the possibility that such a policy might motivate some students to "shape up" in order to stay in school, thus <b>decreasing</b> the likelihood that they end up leading a life of crime. There could also be huge benefits for "the rest" of the students, who would benefit from an improved learning environment.
<br>>
<br>
<br>No, look this is the big thing here - the kids who are turning into criminals are not motivated to shape up to stay in school. That is a Hollywood fantasy, and this is what I see every day:
<br>
<br>That kid's parents were that kid 15 years ago, because 20 years before that, their parents dropped out of school. That kid does not understand the importance of an education in the same way we do, because nobody he trusts has taught him that.
<br>
<br>That kid is not old enough to realize that if s/he fucks up their education, they are making a real difficult life for themselves. They cannot comprehend that yet.
<br>
<br>I agree with the improved environment for other kids, <b>inside the school</b>, but those expellees are sitting outside the school, forming gangs because they don't have anything better to do; getting laid because they have money and drugs, and kids in the school see that and learn the wrong thing.
<br>
<br>> > Your plan: Do away with gym equipment.
<br>> > Result of your plan: Unhealthy and obese population which will drain our health care system.
<br>>
<br>> If a kid is motivated enough to work out regularly at a school gym, or do what it takes to be on a competitive sports team, then he'll find other avenues to do that outside of school, if school suddenly stopped providing these services.
<br>
<br>The point of gym equipment is to expose a kid to something, so that they can figure out if they like it, and to teach them how to do it properly, so they can pursue it if they'd like.
<br>
<br>I will happily concede that sports budgets are a bit excessive, but only if you concede that it's that way because that's what people want, and how they vote.
<br>
<br>>
<br>> > Your plan: Do away with books and use computers
<br>> > Result of your plan: You need a computer for every child. This makes sense economically, and I fully support it.
<br>>
<br>> I disagree with DeathClaw on this one. Computers are, for the most part, completely unnecessary to educate children (with the exception of courses specifically related to computing). Not only are they unnecessary, I'm seriously doubt whether they're cost-effective compared to, say, taking that money and giving it directly to teachers in the form of salary increases.
<br>>
<br>
<br>Thank you.
<br>