Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Party Rooster, Apr 4, 2013.
I like the spirit of the bill, but doubt it'll pass.
I like how it says it makes no mention of middle or high income families for penalties. Look deek they are not getting tax payer aid so there wouldnt be a penalty.
This bill is asking that parents take some responsibility and not just bashing those people who have fallen on hard times(yeah that ole gag). Far be it for parents to have an interest in how well their kids do in school. This will never pass
How am i gonna go to the club all the time if I gotta make sure my kid does their homework?
Just make the parents work. Don't blame the kids that their parents are lazy.
I like the spirit of it to, but it has some problems.
Cumia made a great point on Red Eye a couple of nights ago... this bill excludes kids with learning disabilities, so you're going to see a huge increase in those diagnosed with ADD and so on.
They already do: kids with bad grades get disability payments. And they're bigger than welfare checks, so even if this passes, it will make no difference.
Does Tennessee have school choice? I could see the argument of trying to enact something like this post-school choice. But if the kids are stuck in a shitty school district with no way of getting out to get a better education, I don't really think this bill is fair.
You didn't play GUESS THE PARTY!!!!!!
To me it again comes to parents responsibility to take care of their kids education. Sure some poor will say they want their kids to have a better education, but they wont do anything to actually help, and if they have to put any effort into it they will bitch how the schools need to be better.
We are thinking of moving to Florida which has a lot of shitty schools. So we are either going to A- Pay more to live in a nicer area with better schools. Or B- Look into charter schools or cyber schooling.
People have options but that requires them to get off their lazy asses and do something about it. I actually wish schools could kick the problem students out and make them have to cyber school, making the current schools better, but of course that will interrupt momma watching her stories while waiting for the check to arrive. Imagine how pissed off some parents would be if a school told them their kid is an interruption and therefore has to stay home and be cyber schooled. Then they would be accountable and they wouldnt like that shit at all. That would be great.
I remember a bunch of kids in my high school who only came to school for "free lunch".
There are already mechanisms in place for this, they are just not enforced because terrible shit happens to the child of a parent that is guilty of educational neglect. In new York the standard for educational neglect is way to forgiving. I don't know if other states list educational neglect as a form of child abuse. The idea of getting parents involved in their kids schooling is great, this is a bad way of going about it.
30 year olds gotta eat too.
Then what are school districts suppose to do? Every time someone comes up with an idea everyone is so fast to say it wont work, but never come up with an alternative. Maybe they should just go ahead and put something in place, and tweak it if they feel necessary.
All the districts are asking is that in order to continue to get free money, that they make sure there kid does well in school. You wouldnt think you would have to pay parents to want to do that. If their kids do well they have nothing to worry about. If they are a piece of shit parent then they need to suffer some kind of consequence for being a shit parent. Allowing them to continue letting their kids be pieces of shit in school, all that going to happen is these same kids will be pieces of shit in life and will do nothing but be a drain on society.
last i checked (when i was in high school) if you dont finish by 21 they kick you out
too, not to. And you're wrong, this is a good way to go about it, because it provides a direct monetary incentive. Direct monetary incentives are the only government actions that even remotely work. Everything else is just wishful thinking.
Yep, this would accomplish getting shitty parents involved... involved in beating the fuck out of some poor kid who gets shitty grades because his parents are uninvolved dirtbags.
This is very close, but it needs to be based on attendance, not grades.
If someone beats the shit out of their kids, they don't need a special reason for it.
This is how it is set up in nyc thirty days truancy and the welfare gets cut. As a result you are going to get all the shit heads every twenty nine days.
As was said before, this will lead to lots of physical violence against the kids. What this does is create an even larger burden on the state.
If you want involvement it has to be from the parents not from some external pressure. There has to be some system in place where the parents are actively encouraged to get involved. Punishment and removal of benefits will not help.
This should not be tied to grades it should be tied by involvement with the school, if I knew how to effectively measure that I would be a millionaire.
Sorry for the typo on the phone.
Don't worry about it. It wasn't a typo though, you used the wrong word.
Here's a fucking idea, end the welfare culture and then students are rewarded for doing well in school by being able to get employment at 18 years old, which would then be necessary for survival.
By "end the welfare culture" you mean TAKE AWAY the money every poor person in America is ENTITLED TO by birth right?
Those kinds of PUNITIVE measures of not giving people free shit for no reason except that they never bothered earning it could never work. They would lead to all kinds of bad things. Millions of kids would die, for sure, of hunger. You're worse than Hitler for suggesting it.
You can't do it suddenly, but we need to start implementing measures that greatly reduces it.
For one, start drug testing. I'm against the illegality of drugs, but not against a company's right to test for them. If they're limiting their employment eligibility, then they don't deserve taxpayer funds.
If you have a single child on welfare, you are required to go on mandatory birth control... in the form of one of those shots they give you every six months or whatever. Just make them come into the office every six months to pick up their check and get their shot.
Required volunteering. This would greatly reduce the cost of employing city workers.
And don't be afraid to fucking cut them off. We can't save every child, but I think most will get by somehow anyway.