What does "right" mean?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by nbs2, Jan 23, 2008.

  1. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #1
    I always understood that when someone has a right (whether or not a given right is actually a right is beside the point), that means that they have the choice to exercise that right. If people choose not to exercise that right, that is up to them.

    So why would we pay someone to study? Not for serving as tutors, but as tutees.
     
  2. xUKHCx Administrator emeritus

    xUKHCx

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Location:
    The Kop
    #2
    Here in the UK we have a similar scheme forget the name now though.

    Here is how I see it

    1.) Some people can not afford to commit time to school after hours and have to get a job to pay for necessary items. This detracts from their school work and can lead to lower grades. Lower grade generally means lower potential future earnings due to career paths and opportunities. So why should this person not be afforded the same opportunities as someone who has come from a wealthier background. It is one way of trying to level the unjust birth lottery.

    2.) Greater education serves to benefit society in general and it is an incentive to get people to study, therefore it is a benefit to society in general.
     
  3. abijnk macrumors 68040

    abijnk

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #3
    I agree with xUKHCx, if the school district can afford it and it works all the more power to them.

    Where I live we still have kids that leave before the end of the school year to help with planting and other farm work, if the kids could help make money this way it would be much better for everyone, but the schools around here are lucky to exist, so I don't see it happening any time soon.
     
  4. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #4
    Please define "we". Are you suggesting that this program is being funded by tax dollars?
     
  5. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #5
    Would you please stop promoting your socialist values to us god-fearing 'Mercans? They make too much logical sense and you might pollute the minds of our young folk. Everyone knows that if you can't afford an education you should just go die. When will you goofy, limp-wristed Europeans get it? :)
     
  6. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #6
    This is America. If those kids have been taught anything, it's the fact that money is king. What's more the program is being funded privately, so it's basically a little social engineering thrown in with private capitalism. How could you possibly find anything wrong with that?

    It's also pretty well proven that teens have a very poor sense of judgment and as a result, their rights are limited. This is well established in law. Besides, it's probably not a result of the kids refusing to assert their rights as it is a failure of their parents and the community at large to impress upon them the importance of education.

    Money talks.
     
  7. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #7
    Money doesn't talk, it swears.
     
  8. imac/cheese macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    #8
    The word socialist can be an offensive term and the ideas that xUKHCx presented do not in any way resemble the socialist regimes that have been responsible for many atrocities over past century. ;)

    In my opinion this will be an interesting experiment and I am curious to see how it turns out.
     
  9. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #9
    Intersting that the OP hasn't yet come back to answer the questions posed to him...
     
  10. nbs2 thread starter macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #10
    You bring up a good point, but my concern is why are those who are struggling being invited? Wouldn't it make more sense to encourage those who come from the same background, but still work hard, to serve as tutors by paying them? The article doesn't indicate what the tutors receive for their work. So, they could be getting paid $16/hour but that seems to be a salient enough point to have been given some mention.

    Just because a system can afford it doesn't make it a good idea. I'm not saying that this is a waste of money, but I just think there may be better uses.

    The program is being funded privately, but the implementation seems misdirected. Clearly, if the donor intended to have the money spent in this way, who am I to stop him? But, capitalism should reward those who excel - as I suggested above, it would have been better to provide the tutors with the pay. Maybe providing healthy meals (which many of those students are not getting at home) or other less fungible goods that would directly benefit the tutees. Many of these kids are being enrolled in these programs because they have trouble with forward planning and decision making. Wouldn't it be better to give them something that will help with the decisions?

    As for their failure to assert their "right to an education", that is something that the state has long since decided that a 16yo is old enough to take responsibility for. That would be the 10th and 11th graders. As for the others, maybe greater financially-backed effort needs to be made to impress upon them the importance of education. Just because we provide incentives for attendance doesn't mean that they will get anymore out of them than they get out of their state mandated attendance at their respective schools.

    Unlike some, I do have a life outside of these forums. Perhaps my one, in passing comment, after discussing a thread with a non-forum-using friend, indicated to you otherwise.
     
  11. scotthayes macrumors 68000

    scotthayes

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    Location:
    Birmingham, England
    #11
    You sir should standup and take a bow, you have given the perfect answer why this is a good idea.
     
  12. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #12
    You should read up on the poor houses and the work houses of the 19th century. What you're advocating is basically an extension of them. Not only that, but an extension of something that totally and utterly failed.

    Why continue to advocate for something that doesn't work? It seems that you're only interested in punishing people who make poor decisions and not interested in helping them make better ones.
     
  13. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #13
    The point isn't whether paying tutors helps kids. It's a pilot program to test whether paying kids helps kids.

    I note in your original post, you left the impression that taxpayers were paying for this. Not sure if that's because you didn't do your due dilligence, or because you were deliberately trying to leave that impression; but the fact remains that a private donor wanted to provide funds to test this concept.

    And while it is certainly your right to criticize, there should be no outrage over "us" paying for it.

    Capitalism has it's failings, and one of them is that capitalism isn't designed to help the bottom rungs of society. In a pure capitalist society, people would be left to starve in the streets for lack of money. That's why we have safety nets. If this program works (and I have my doubts too), it will succeed in providing a way for people from underprivileged homes the same chance at success the rest of us have had. And be doing so, it will reduce the future burden on the safety net system. If we spend a few dollars on these kids now, we may save tens of thousands a year if it keeps them on the straight and narrow. With that kind of potential return, you can even afford to have this program fail a large number of the kids they try to help, and still be saving money in the long term.

    Well the government has mandated that we are not allowed to leave any children behind. Not even the ones who want to be left behind. Schools facing the prospect of being taken over by the feds (is there anything more antithetical to conservatism than such an idea?) will be willing to try increasingly desperate things to get test scores up. Not the least of which is simply teaching to the tests, which means even fewer of the bright kids get much out of their state-mandated attendance.

    Ooo... very snarky insinuation. Unfortunately for you, I also have a life outside these forums, but I knew that accusation would bring you running within minutes. As it did. :D

    I'm still waiting for you to define "we" though.
     
  14. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #14
    Difference between rights and incentives. These sorts of programs try to overcome barriers to entry and to provide short-term incentives since individuals in general seem so bad at prioritizing long-term incentives above the short-term. I have mixed feelings about such approaches, but if they get the job done and produce a benefit that exceeds their cost, then hey, who am I to argue.
     
  15. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #15
    As I've alluded to above, I also have mixed feeling about this.

    The difference is that "some" appear willing to substitute their ideological notions of how they feel this will work for empirical evidence of whether this works or not.

    Let's try it and see. If it fails, I've got no problem scrapping the idea. If it's successful, good on them.
     

Share This Page