• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cincinnati High School Paying Students To Come To School

muciti said:
I dont care what you read. There were millions born that year, because 2 were that successful means nothing. It is a coincidence.
Click to expand...

Dude, I listed only one thing those two men share. They have far, far, far more factors that are based entirely on the circumstance of where, when, and to whom they were born than the work they actually had to do. Their wealth is primarily the result of chance. If they had been born a year later, or to a different family, then they would not have been as successful as they were. This isn't up for debate. It is statistically demonstrable. But I'm not surprised that you wouldn't want to read a book that might challenge your preconceived notions. Critical thinking isn't exactly the strong suit conservatives.
 
CriticalThought said:
Dude, I listed only one thing those two men share. They have far, far, far more factors that are based entirely on the circumstance of where, when, and to whom they were born than the work they actually had to do. Their wealth is primarily the result of chance. If they had been born a year later, or to a different family, then they would not have been as successful as they were. This isn't up for debate. It is statistically demonstrable. But I'm not surprised that you wouldn't want to read a book that might challenge your preconceived notions. Critical thinking isn't exactly the strong suit conservatives.
Click to expand...

You are making all kinds of assumptions there. Their wealth is not by chance, it is the result of great ideas and hard work. You don't know what would have happened if they were born a year later. You have no idea whether or not i will or wont read that book, or what my reasons for reading it or not reading it are. and lastly you are assuming that i am conservative just becuase. You didnt make a single statement in that post that is actually a fact.
 
muciti said:
You are making all kinds of assumptions there. Their wealth is not by chance, it is the result of great ideas and hard work. You don't know what would have happened if they were born a year later. You have no idea whether or not i will or wont read that book, or what my reasons for reading it or not reading it are. and lastly you are assuming that i am conservative just becuase. You didnt make a single statement in that post that is actually a fact.
Click to expand...

I'm not making any assumptions. Read the book.
 
CriticalThought said:
I'm not making any assumptions. Read the book.
Click to expand...

Yes you are and I just listed them. Please tell me one thing. How is it possible that authors of that book know what would have happened if bill gates had been born a year later? Do they have a magic time machine that will take them to an alternate reality? Or did an angel show up on christmas eve to show them what would have happened?

How is that book going to tell me whether or not i am a conservative?

How is that book going to know why I choose to read it or choose not too?

How is that book going to cover all you blind assumptions that you made in that last post?? Explain it to me.
 
CriticalThought said:
You can make 10K in a few hours selling drugs on the street or you can go to school and work your ass off to go college, amass student loan debt, and then end up on food stamps because you can't get a job.

It's funny, all the "capitalists" on this forum, and not a single one of them understands incentive or what kinds of incentives the kids living in poverty experience in this day and age.
Click to expand...

So why don't the rich kids sell drugs, too? Everybody would love to make that kind of money, right?

Integrity.
 
Erod said:
So why don't the rich kids sell drugs, too? Everybody would love to make that kind of money, right?

Integrity.
Click to expand...

That was perhaps one of the dumbest posts I have ever seen on this forum.
 
Erod said:
So why don't the rich kids sell drugs, too? Everybody would love to make that kind of money, right?

Integrity.
Click to expand...

Opportunity cost, Erod. Poor kids/adults have a lot less to lose by selling drugs as well as the potential to gain a lot more by comparison. To make the move from the ghetto to prison is a lot better than the suburbs to prison. That having been said, I've known a few rich kids to sell drugs...hell, they can afford the better lawyers when/if they get caught.

Secondly, how does your view of certain drugs effect ones level of integrity. If a person, for example, believes that marijuana is more helpful than harmful how would selling it make one lack integrity. It certainly may be a dumb risk, but it's not necessarily a question of integrity.
 
muciti said:
Yes you are and I just listed them. Please tell me one thing. How is it possible that authors of that book know what would have happened if bill gates had been born a year later? Do they have a magic time machine that will take them to an alternate reality? Or did an angel show up on christmas eve to show them what would have happened?

How is that book going to tell me whether or not i am a conservative?

How is that book going to know why I choose to read it or choose not too?

How is that book going to cover all you blind assumptions that you made in that last post?? Explain it to me.
Click to expand...

Read the book. I'm not going to infringe on the author's copy write. Why are most professional athletes born in the same months? Why is the most successful lawyers in New York, Jewish decedents of grocers? Many good questions. All answered in that book.

As far as how I know, its because it isn't just Gates and Jobs. It's dozens of people who were born around the exact same time and who are now billionaires in that field. The time they were born had more to do with their success than anything else.
 
CriticalThought said:
A productive member of society? You mean like the CEOs, bankers, and Wall Street brokers who steal millions and then get the government to bail them out for millions more? Do you mean the people who work and save their entire life and then lose everything because they end up with an illness and they are underinsured? How about all those hard working and productive people in the last few years who watched their 401Ks disappear and ended up under water on their mortgage?

I'm sorry, but I don't think you can feed that bull crap, fantasy American dream stuff to kids living in poverty in this day and age when they have witnessed the corruption of the last decade. They are as you wanted them to be. They are materialistic consumers, who think greed is good, and will innovate whatever way they can to make quick cash rather than waste their lives toiling under the plow just to have the fruits of their labor stripped from them by a celebrated rich crook who will never face repercussions.
Click to expand...


what psychobabble. how many CEO's bankers or even wall street types (the people who bankrolled Obama-wait you might have a point there) are doing what you claim?
 
TurtleDude said:
what psychobabble. how many CEO's bankers or even wall street types (the people who bankrolled Obama-wait you might have a point there) are doing what you claim?
Click to expand...

You are going to try to say that CEO's and Wall St elites have NOT played by rules that might be viewed as a little skewed in their favor? And you're right, Obama was bankrolled by these same people, and I DO have a BIG problem with it. I don't think any of the problems with our government will be solved without publicly funded elections, regardless of (D) or (R) prefixing their name.

Edit: This is not a blanket statement to all corporate officers. Simply a statement that the playing field is not level. I earn a good living and am taxed accordingly. There will always be wage disparity but I do believe that the road to economic success isn't through polarity between the top and bottom, but a solid middle instead.
 
Last edited:
Midwest Lib said:
You are going to try to say that CEO's and Wall St elites have NOT played by rules that might be viewed as a little skewed in their favor? And you're right, Obama was bankrolled by these same people, and I DO have a BIG problem with it. I don't think any of the problems with our government will be solved without publicly funded elections, regardless of (D) or (R) prefixing their name.

Edit: This is not a blanket statement to all corporate officers. Simply a statement that the playing field is not level. I earn a good living and am taxed accordingly. There will always be wage disparity but I do believe that the road to economic success isn't through polarity between the top and bottom, but a solid middle instead.
Click to expand...


want a solid middle class? then get rid of the dependency dope that addicts so many people to mediocrity
 
TurtleDude said:
want a solid middle class? then get rid of the dependency dope that addicts so many people to mediocrity
Click to expand...

NEVER and I repeat, NEVER will you stop people from getting high, so good luck getting rid of anything. Just to play devils advocate (and I'm not saying i support it) wouldn't it be more logical that if all drugs were legal that use may still be an issue, distribution would be MUCH less profitable?

Secondly, are you referring to "dope" as marijuana specifically or drugs in general? I just don't see much social harm in pot.
 
Last edited:
jamesrage said:
I do not think kids should receive cash from tax payers for doing something that they should already be doing.I think it will create some sort of idea that people are supposed to pay you to do things you are already supposed to be doing. It amounts to giving people for not speeding,or giving people money because they paid their bills.
Click to expand...

If these kids drop out (or even if they graduate without actually learning anything), they'll probably cost the taxpayers a lot more than a $25 gift card. It's in the public's economic interests to ensure that students are well-educated, and if small rewards for doing so proves to be effective, I'm not opposed to trying it out. If nothing else, it's cheaper than paying a truant officer to round them up.

Besides, I think it's good practice for the "real world." It teaches students at an early age that working hard can result in financial reward. For students living in poverty, the vague hope that they'll earn a better-paying job several years hence may not be a visible enough reward; a gift card makes it more tangible and immediate.

Erod said:
Yep.

My motivation was, if I didn't go to school and perform, my dad would have my ass, and my mom would take away every ounce of limited freedom I had. That, and they managed to install enough personal pride and desire to succeed that I took my future into my own hands.

And no, we weren't wealthy by any stretch.
Click to expand...

Not everyone is fortunate enough to have parents who care about their success.
 
Last edited:
Midwest Lib said:
NEVER and I repeat, NEVER will you stop people from getting high, so good luck getting rid of anything. Just to play devils advocate (and I'm not saying i support it) wouldn't it be more logical that if all drugs were legal that use may still be an issue, distribution would be MUCH less profitable?

Secondly, are you referring to "dope" as marijuana specifically or drugs in general? I just don't see much social harm in pot.
Click to expand...

you really missed my point

the dope is that of government handouts (dependency dope)
 
CriticalThought said:
You can make 10K in a few hours selling drugs on the street or you can go to school and work your ass off to go college, amass student loan debt, and then end up on food stamps because you can't get a job.

It's funny, all the "capitalists" on this forum, and not a single one of them understands incentive or what kinds of incentives the kids living in poverty experience in this day and age.
Click to expand...

What a load of hogwash this is.

First, the VAST majority of kids do not get into selling drugs on the street

Second, if you can make "10k in a few hours" selling drugs on the street and are tempted to do that instead of going to school, I highly doubt a few $25 visa gift cards is going to change that

Three, Last I checked the majority of college graduates do not end up on food stamps and can't get a job.

Fourth, there are incentives in life other than simply monetary ones, and the act of learning at a young age helps instill the notion that taking effort to better ones self is one such example. If the very first thing a child does that isn't mildly "fun" is something they're getting paid to do it establishes in them that should they have to do anything that isn't simply for enjoyments sake then they should have to be paid for it.

Fifth, children are gaining something from school. Education, skills, knowledge, etc. This is not equivalent to "Work" where largely you are performing services or actions aiding others, not yourself directly. There are far better ways that money can be spent in the school system then thinking every child is going to be best and most efficiently and beneficially incentivized by money. Leave that to parents if they so choose to go that route with their child.

Sixth, alternatively if you feel this is important than you can look into a private school...such as this one...and go with this. It's actually an example of why going with a more choice based education system would be helpful. Those that feel this kind of style would be most beneficial could pay the money themselves to send their kids to such schools and get such bonuses while others can choose a different option. But it has no place in the public school system.
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin said:
First, the VAST majority of kids do not get into selling drugs on the street
Click to expand...

We were talking about kids in poverty.

Second, if you can make "10k in a few hours" selling drugs on the street and are tempted to do that instead of going to school, I highly doubt a few $25 visa gift cards is going to change that
Click to expand...

Never said they would.

Three, Last I checked the majority of college graduates do not end up on food stamps and can't get a job.
Click to expand...

When did you check last?

Fourth, there are incentives in life other than simply monetary ones, and the act of learning at a young age helps instill the notion that taking effort to better ones self is one such example. If the very first thing a child does that isn't mildly "fun" is something they're getting paid to do it establishes in them that should they have to do anything that isn't simply for enjoyments sake then they should have to be paid for it.
Click to expand...

I'm not disagreeing with ya at all, but the culture of kids in poverty is that materialism is all that matter. Since you missed the impoverished part, a lot of my argument apparently didn't make much sense to you.
 
CriticalThought said:
This "self made man" fantasy is the biggest load of bullcrap and no one buys it anymore except for old stupid farts. It is statistically proven that wealth has more to do with chance than with work. It is no coincidence that Bill Gates and Steve Jobs were born the same damn year!
Click to expand...

Wealth having more to do with a chance than with work does not equate that "self made man" = fantasy or a big of bullcrap. Anyone "not buying" that becoming a self made man is still possible is frankly ignorant of reality in this country. It absolutely is not a fantasy and still possible to be a self made man in this country. Is it easier to do if you have money already? Absolutely...that's not new, that's been true for centuries. However, NOT having wealth does not mean that its not possible to succeed and still be a self made man. What's fantasy and a load of bullcrap is the vast majority of the inaccurate and downright provably false statements you've made throughout this thread.
 
TurtleDude said:
you really missed my point

the dope is that of government handouts (dependency dope)
Click to expand...

You're right, I did. My apologies.

As to your original point, I agree that one should be more driven to work and succeed than be given handouts to eek by in life. I however think a lot of the problem starts at the top. Wage disparities have grown more and more while minimum wage and appreciation for US labor has not. If more wealth weren't accumulated at the very top not as many people would NEED handouts. I don't abhor capitalism, in fact I appreciate it but I am an advocate for a level playing field. The very rich effect policy hugely in this country on both sides of the aisle and there is no way to deny it, agreed?
 
Zyphlin said:
Wealth having more to do with a chance than with work does not equate that "self made man" = fantasy or a big of bullcrap. Anyone "not buying" that becoming a self made man is still possible is frankly ignorant of reality in this country. It absolutely is not a fantasy and still possible to be a self made man in this country. Is it easier to do if you have money already? Absolutely...that's not new, that's been true for centuries. However, NOT having wealth does not mean that its not possible to succeed and still be a self made man. What's fantasy and a load of bullcrap is the vast majority of the inaccurate and downright provably false statements you've made throughout this thread.
Click to expand...

The self made man fantasy is that it is hard work alone, and very little chance at all, that leads to people being successful. The reality is that chance weighs very heavily in success. I was not arguing that nobody is a "self made man", only the notion that self made men got there by hard work alone is a delusion.
 
Zyphlin said:
Fourth, there are incentives in life other than simply monetary ones, and the act of learning at a young age helps instill the notion that taking effort to better ones self is one such example. If the very first thing a child does that isn't mildly "fun" is something they're getting paid to do it establishes in them that should they have to do anything that isn't simply for enjoyments sake then they should have to be paid for it.
Click to expand...

That's already the prevailing mindset in this country, for better or worse. How often do ANY of us do things that we don't enjoy if we aren't getting paid? I'm a pretty well-balanced guy, and virtually everything I do for free is geared toward maximizing my enjoyment (even if it's sometimes in a roundabout way). Besides, what's wrong with the principle of getting paid to work hard anyway? I see no reason that we need to shield students from this mindset; it might be good for them.

Fifth, children are gaining something from school. Education, skills, knowledge, etc.
Click to expand...

These things are often too intangible and too distant for a 15-year-old to appreciate them. A $25 Visa gift card is tangible and immediate.

This is not equivalent to "Work" where largely you are performing services or actions aiding others, not yourself directly.
Click to expand...

And while that distinction might make perfect sense as an abstract political theory, it's likely to be lost on a high school kid living in poverty.

There are far better ways that money can be spent in the school system then thinking every child is going to be best and most efficiently and beneficially incentivized by money.
Click to expand...

I don't know if it will work or be effective, but I don't see the harm in trying. We'll never know if some schools don't try it out. I think most of us would agree that it would be worth an extra $25 per student if it actually helped them learn more...the only question is whether actually paying the student the $25 is an effective way to achieve that goal. It hardly seems like an obvious slam-dunk that this experiment won't work.

Leave that to parents if they so choose to go that route with their child.
Click to expand...

That might work fine at suburban schools, but many students at impoverished inner-city schools do not have any sort of stable family life to provide them with this (or any other) kind of support.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom