Time Magazine Article Proves People Are Stupid

[dmw007]

I don't need a time magazine article to prove to me that people are stupid. Thats a given.

This was my thought as well.

 

[Kingsly]

This was my thought as well.

Well then, its settled.
People are stupid

I have had wayyy to many run-ins with stupid people who are so consumed in their own little bubbles to even realize that there is a whole world outside of America, or for that matter (and Im not making this up) outside of California. Yes, I had to convince someone that Chicago is a city in Illinois, which is part of the U.S.A. (they couldn't even grasp the idea of City, State, Country-even with the help of an atlas.)
People are stupid.

 

[JLatte]

Personally, I wouldn't think it would be that bad if for an entire year or maybe even until the minor is 18 years of age, they should have to take a bus or some form of public transportation. I can personally say that I am a high school drop out (for necessary reasons at the time), and that I had to take the bus because if I wanted a car, I would have to buy it myself.

Honestly, children are spoiled beyond all hell (for the most part), and take many things and luxuries for granted. I know there's exceptions here, but I'm not talking about them You definitly appreciate and take better care of a car better when you have to take another form of transportation.

 

[nbs2]

Telling them what to do would be making them complete high school - by law.

There is no obligation to complete high school - only a denial of a privilege. Just like if I don't earn 40 work credits, I am not eligible for Social Security. I am not denied the right to get money some other way, but the government won't support me. If Child A knows that if he drops out he won't get to drive to whatever job he has lined up (or not), it is one more incentive. If Adult A knows that he won't get SS unless he earns about $3k/year for 10 years, he has an incentive to work.

This is not a question of "free lunch". It is a question of taking away a privilege from kids who drop out - a privilege that would be granted to other kids their age. You are taking away what currently is permitted.

Be very careful there. They are not losing anything if the opportunity is taken away. An opportunity is no longer available. It is important to note the distinction between these two. If you ahve a DL, you have a property interest in that DL, and the government has to have a good reason to take it. If you don't have a DL, you have no property interest. They can take it away for whatever reason. If the people vote in a legislature that wants to change the driving age to 21, they can. There is nothing that the non-DL'd can do about it. If the DL is to be taken away, then you have a huge mess with administartive hearings and the like. But, now I'm drifting off topic.

Now i'll reuse your cookie analogy in a way that i believe it works - let's say your kid throws a fit and threatens you to hold his breath, etc, and you won't hear anything of it. The kid continues to whine like mad and won't give up on it. You then have two choices: You can sit and talk to the kid about how he feels about the cookie - teach him to express his feelings. This may not be exactly what the kid has earned from you, but it will help the kid mature, and he will learn what he has done wrong. He will also realize, through your patience and energy, that you do care about him, which is probably a big part of why the child chose to be destructive/bratty to begin with.

It is the same situation with a dropout. You can leave him to cry in the corner (and eventually turn away from you), or you can try to support him and talk him through his feelings, and most importantly, show that you care about him and want him to succeed. Tossing the kid to the wolves doesn't accomplish anything. No matter how much he "deserves it".

You make an excellent point. We should make an effort to explain why it is essential to get a HS diploma. Yes, Henry, Jobs, Gates, and friends all dropped out of college. But, they have shown that they finished HS. They have also shown that you don't need a car to get to work. Would you be happier if the announcement was accompanied by an explanation that it is essential to finish HS, that low HS graduation rates lead to a less productive economy and will lead to the continued movement of jobs overseas and that eventually the US will cease to be a superpower, but will become an also-ran as countries like China, Singapore, and India become the world's economic heavyweights as nothing can stop them and their massive brainpower and their drive for excellence! Ok, it may not be that dire. But, since nobody has the right to drive and people under 18 do not have the right to enter into contracts (if you are under 18 and enter into a traditional contract, it may be unenforcable), including work contracts, these kids may find themselves in a world of hurt.

Oh, and as somethign to think about, where do you draw the line on child labor (remember, that's why we have the employment restrictions for minors...). One last thing - I personally believe that they should not be allowed to drive and that they should be obligated to work - hard labor (which I respect, but is tough on the body) is always a good way to teach people that school has its benefits.

 

[eva01]

If people don't want to allow others the chance to get a driver's license due to dropping out of high school, thats fine by me.

As long as everyones tax money goes to better public transportation.

I would not be able to work in this town if i didn't have a license.

 

[dmw007]

Well then, its settled.
People are stupid

I have had wayyy to many run-ins with stupid people who are so consumed in their own little bubbles to even realize that there is a whole world outside of America, or for that matter (and Im not making this up) outside of California. Yes, I had to convince someone that Chicago is a city in Illinois, which is part of the U.S.A. (they couldn't even grasp the idea of City, State, Country-even with the help of an atlas.)
People are stupid.

It is truly scary when you stop to think about some of the misperceptions that people hold.

 

[Kingsly]

It is truly scary when you stop to think about some of the misperceptions that people hold.

Yeah, like that a $200 computer from bestbuy is actually going to do work, much less turn on.

All I see is
Girls: I need to get my nails done, thats hot, my hair hurts...
Guys: Dude, my pickup truck can tow the space shuttle! f***ing A!!!

Ask either of them who William McKinley was or where Sudan is and you'll be met with a lovely blank stare.
Oh the price one pays for living in L.A.

 

[Abstract]

As someone already stated, driving isn't a right; it's a privilege to be earned and that can also be taken away if abused. In the more major cities, though, I would surmise that ready access to mass transit makes this a moot point. For those of us who live in areas where cars are a necessity, one would think that denying driving licenses to dropouts would be pretty good motivation to see it through and get their diplomas.

What does driving have to do with education level? I just don't get it? It's not against the law to drop out of high school, and nobody should be punished because of it. If someone drops out of high school and still manages to do well for themselves financially, then more power to them. They did what they want and STILL live comfortably. They should be allowed to buy their own car and drive it, maybe more so than you. They might pay more taxes than you, after all.

Both questions are stupid. For 1) A drivers license is earned by showing that you have the proficiency to drive. That's the criterion on which you're judged - it has nothing to do with your education. To base it on that is just stupid. For 2) What? Are people serious? Not allowing people to work just because they dropped out of high school? That's the worst idea I've ever heard of.

Exactly.

 

[Phobophobia]

Driving and education are two separate things. Dropping out of high school is not illegal. Taking away something as important as the ability to drive from someone who isn't breaking any laws doesn't make sense.

Some people have circumstances that make it difficult for them to complete high school.

 

[ChrisA]

What was the sample size. How were people selected for the survey. The two questions were asked independtly. We are not even told if all people taking the surveu answered both questions and we certainly do not know if any corelation exsts between a yes answer on one question and the answer for the second. What this proves is that most readers and people here too know little about surveys and statistics. For all we know the first quetion was posed to only regitered republicans in Nevada and the second to people in the county lockup in NY city We are not told enough to make any conclusions.

Surveys are used many times to support some argument because so many people will accept numbers without any critical thinking. But numbers are meaningless unless you know the whole story of how they were computed and in this case we don't have that story.

 

[2nyRiggz]

People have been stupid for years...nothing new here.


Bless

 

[thedude110]

What was the sample size. How were people selected for the survey. The two questions were asked independtly. We are not even told if all people taking the surveu answered both questions and we certainly do not know if any corelation exsts between a yes answer on one question and the answer for the second. What this proves is that most readers and people here too know little about surveys and statistics. For all we know the first quetion was posed to only regitered republicans in Nevada and the second to people in the county lockup in NY city We are not told enough to make any conclusions.

Surveys are used many times to support some argument because so many people will accept numbers without any critical thinking. But numbers are meaningless unless you know the whole story of how they were computed and in this case we don't have that story.

*sighing*

I'm not trying to prove people are stupid by using a survey from Time Magazine. Perhaps my facetiousness should have been associated with an emoticon.

Rather, I'm arguing

Only that the average American seems to want to allow its dropouts to work, but not allow those same dropouts to get to work. The poll reveals that, at the very least, Americans want to strictly limit how far a "dropout" can travel to work (a paved ceiling, or an invisible wall, if you will).

If your point is that I should have used "suggests" rather than "reveals," your point is granted.

FYI:

This TIME/Oprah Winfrey Show poll was conducted March 28-30 among 1,000 adult Americans by SRBI Public Affairs. The margin of error for the entire sample is 3 percentage points. The margin of error is higher for subgroups. "Don't know" responses omitted for some questions. For complete poll results, go to oprah.com

I would link you to the full article, but it requires a subscription.

I would never link you to Oprah's website.

[nonfacetiousemoticon][/nonfacetiousemoticon]

 

[MarkCollette]

I think you guys are forgetting an important aspect of studies, which is that answers depend on how the questions are asked.

From the results, I'm going to make the interpretation/assumption that people are trying to express the following opinion: I prefer there to be a disincentive for dropping out of school, but people sometimes need to work to survive. Probably some percentage viewed driving as something that kids do to hangout with their friends, and some percentage saw it as a way to get to work. And some percentage saw working as a distraction from school so kids can afford cool clothes, and some percentage saw it as a way to pay for food when a kid had to run away from an abusive home. And maybe some percentage carefully thought about all these factors

So, back to how the questions are asked. Let's say you start the study by mentionning the problem of abused runaways, and how they have to fend for themselves. Then you ask about them being allowed to work, and everyone agrees, and then you mention the crappiness of public transit, and ask about the drivers license. Probably, in that situation, no matter what the bias, you'll get high 90% in favour of drop outs getting to do both. I'm sure you get the idea on how things could be arranged to get people to respond in the opposite manner.

So, let's say there's no manipulative talk before-hand, and the question sequence is randomised, so that person 1 gets question A then B and person 2 gets question B then A, etc. You'll get different answers if someone can see the big picture of all the questions, versus answering one at a time.

So, this might be more indicative of a shoddy or biased study than the respondants being dumb.