Question for Education?

And who's going to pay for the teachers' salaries, the costs of operating the schools, teaching material etc. YOU?!

Yes, it is a strange question.

I think that if you really want to talk about the gap between rich and poor and education, I think you should hit the disparities between secondary educational institutes.

Besides, most stuff you learn in college can be learned from a book at your local library. I took 3 courses about Germany's History and it ended up costing around 2000 bucks. Really I could have gotten the same info just by opening up the books, an encyclopedia and reading by myse

Realistically, it doesn't take gobs of money to live a decent life.

Secondly, you are equating higher education with wealth. I'll bet that there are plenty of members here that would dispute that notion.

Third, there is an online community where knowledge is free. It's called the internet, of which CR4 is a minuscule part.

As the other members have pointed out, nothing is free. If you are talking about brick and mortar schools, everything there costs real money that someone has to pay.

Lastly, instead of getting on here and whining about inequality, why not put your time to good use, pick a subject that you are interested in, spend a month researching that subject on the internet, and then check back in and tell us about how much more educated you are? It's just that easy.

PS- Many universities do offer their courses online, for free. It will not get you a degree, but the knowledge is the same. With the advent of the internet, knowledge has never been more accessible to the masses than it is now, in the history of humankind.

Internet definitely provides information free of cost and makes one knowledgable in the area of their interests but it does not help him earn a degree. For getting degree, the person should have formal education which costs lot of money depending on the course. If the person rightly chooses his course, that can make his career then it is not difficult to earn back his invested money...

I have hard time to have two meals a day and have to struggle between meal and internet cafe. This is typical of person in village work on the farm land. The farmer kids can not go to internet caffe and on net.

We are fortunate here in US to our kids take this as given right since they are used to it but visit some time third world and then rewrite your opinon and am sure your opinon will change

I have been to third world countries and am fully aware of the plight of many of the people that live in these countries. It is deplorable in many cases.

I am a US citizen, therefore, my opinions will tend to be colored by my own life experiences.

The US spends 10's of millions of dollars in aid money, food, medicine, etc. every year, not to mention the work that various churches do, in these impoverished areas.

The truth of the matter, is that the answers, whether it is education, infrastructure or how to feed the hungry, will have to come from within these countries themselves.

If the OP lives in an area of the world where higher education for the poor is absolutely impossible, his time would be better spent working to change the policies that make this so, as opposed to posting on CR4, where even the best answers are unlikely to change his circumstances.

One statement is universal, " Those that are unwilling to help themselves, will forever remain entrenched in their current situation". This holds true, wherever you live.

I had a college math professor say, that to be a knowledgable expert of anything just spend an extra hour a day on the subject, in 2 year people will come to reconize that, and you will be an authorian on the subject. It's up to you. p911

Why must anything be such a high price. Why not have everybody work for nothing. I mean if nobody needs to pay any bills, nobody needs any money then. This will just be a completely liberating process. People will no longer have to worry about retirement funds. People can just ask for something or something to be done and people will just graciously do it for the love of humanity. With money completely missing from society, nobody will have to hoard anything. Everything will be freely available, even food. Speaking of food, I'm hungry. Go make a sandwich for me, and don't use that cheap stuff.

Yeah, but who's going to produce the food for your sandwich, it wouldn't be worth the trouble.

My point precisely.

You'd be working for the great good of mankind. What drivel am I speaking, nobody thinks that way anymore. It's all me, me, me, what do I get for it. Were all reverting back to children. It's the thought process we've been programmed with, it will never change because the powerfull ones won't allow it. They get to loose so much.

Still hiding!

redfred,

Here you go. I spent all morning fixing these up for you. Enjoy!

Aww, you even cut the crust for me. OOOH nice salad too.

Nice thought. But how will people get in a position to be better and more powerfull than other people. Because believe you me there are alot of people out there that think that way. It's that invisible force that drives them. I call it greed some people put a vail across it and call it ambition. But when you get down to it and, clear the wood from the trees it's greed.

It really doesn't need to be so.

If you are talented, get a free education in a different part of the world.

When you qualify and pass the exam, you are qualified.

Besides lodging, food, the costs are minimal. And the system produces specialists, not exactly rich university residents.

I know doctors who have spent less than $5,000.00 to get their education and qualifications.

Europe has many institutions with programs for foreigners. The only barrier can be language perhaps? To go back to the doctor's (MD) example. If they had a chance to get educated in medicin, less than practicing the finances, a broken leg, 4 visits, a cast should not need to cost $84,000.00. (recent bill paid in Fl).

As kramarat pointed out there are, such as the following example

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/#electrical-engineering-and-computer-science

As others have pointed out (and as I now will), education costs money but a lot of the higher levels of education (college, university) are subsidised by the government already (such as in New Zealand for example). Free online courses are good to a point but can be very difficult to follow or truly understand without the ability to ask questions and get hands-on practical experience, and generally won't help you get a job.

Why doesn't a band of teachers form an online community where knowledge can be free instead of being held hostage by money grubbing colleges.

http://cr4.globalspec.com/

But seriously though there are plenty of online resources, the largest and most powerful of which is...........(no surprise here)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki

What country are you from pandu that you incorrectly think there is no middle class anymore (India perhaps?). The middle class is there working every day to keep the countries of the world functioning.

Five years ago, I heard an interesting phrase at a college fair that my nephew took me to. "If you're not willing to invest in yourself, why should an employer be interested in you?" I have no idea who said this, it could've been a recruiter or a frustrated parent. But it sums up so much.

Pandu,

Personally, while degrees are required for many jobs, I think they are over rated, unless it is in a highly specialized field.

As degrees become more and more ambiguous, they become worth less and less. On that note, what do you think a degree would be worth if everyone had one?

"Nothing"

This is already the case in Taiwan. Everyone has a degree - including the roadsweeper - so to distinguish oneself, you had to get a Masters. Then most people had Masters, so the best had to get PhDs, then....so the best had to have PhDs from overseas universities, for which they have to pay very highly (they did at the postgrad uni I was at).

In Britain we are debating how tertiaty education is to be paid for. We provide free-at-the point-of-use education from 5 - 18 yrs, and still we hear there are high levels of literacy. THIS is the barrier to social mobility, better jobs and a better economy. It has other unseen effects too. Those who wish to improve their learning - like my Mum who wanted to learn law when in her 50s after leaving school at 16 (economic pressures): 10 years ago she attended an affordable night school course and took Law 'A' level (the exam 18 yo take); now, I doubt she'd find a course because all of that education funding is being used to teach numeracy and literacy - to those who threw away their free education. I'd like to continue learning languages - but there are no courses in Italian and German at my level within at least 60 miles (I've looked) and if there were, they'd be 4 or 5 times the cost of 4 years ago (remember inflation is running a 2 - 3% a year).

When 10-20% of your population goes to tertiaty education, it can be funded through taxes. When 50%+ goes, other funding models have to be used. Just look at what's happended to UK University fnding over the last 20 years if you don't believe me.

/rant off

pandu, pandu, pandu,

Take a deep breath or two, and relax. Listen to the advice of these people.

Nothing is free, Grasshopper.

It is my belief that education is the best investment that any society can make toward it's future prosperity and stability. In this light, I believe that everyone should have the right, regardless of there ability to pay, to an education up to the limits of their intellectual ability.

I believe that you are right.

I agree... and a person thus educated should know and use the difference between 'there' and 'their'.

And, just so that we are clear on the difference between them, why don't you inform us of that difference?

And, you might as well throw in "they're", or they are?

CR4 Admin: Part of this post was deleted because it was an attack on another user and used offensive language. Please review the CR4 Site FAQ and the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

So you'll be upset if I point out that he also misplaced an apostrophe in it's (sic) which should have been its.

I still remember being taught this in my local state provide junior school aged 8.

No, I've been taken to task for berating the Guest in another, later, thread. I will just thank you for pointing out the error.

I just can't keep my fingers still. The naughty step and I are becoming close friends.

It is hard not to agree with your statement. Many states make serious efforts to invest in it's citizen's education. I have just put three of my own kids through post secondary schools. To assist me with expenses, I was given the ability to create a tax exempt fund form the time each child was born. I did take advantage of this fund and was able to send each of my children to tuition funded schools. They all graduated without a heavy financial burden. Japan and Denmark also have similar funded post secondary education. Loans and grants are still available for support.

What we really need to do is to have a structured fund for third world countries and individual children within these countries. If first world order countries donated money to such a fund (maybe UNESCO could be the pivot on this type of fund), then individual families would be able to realize a substantial fund to support future education needs for their children. Hope in the betterment of your child's life is a universal aspiration. It would be expected that bright children ( equally available to girls and boys) would be given such hope. The family would be able to track the fund and know their child's future is secured through education. If they opted out of educating the child, the fund would be redirected to another child. In a very optimistic mood I believe these types of funds would act as a catalyst to promote world peace.

"Many states make serious efforts to invest in it's citizen's education."

It isn't the states, governments, job to educate it's citizens. The responsibility lies with us as the parents. The kids will do much better when there are people involved in their learning with a vested interest in the outcome and success of the kids.

We choose how and where our kids get an education. We have chosen to educate our kids at home where they get correct information; not run through the political correctness and historical revisionist filters; and are learning how to think and process information in an environment that is beneficial to their intellectual, spiritual, physcial and social well-being. They are also able to apply that information in a home-based business setting.

In the secondary education, where more specialized information and training is needed, that is done by businesses (colleges/universities) whose job is to operate in such a way that they are providing a quality product, so more customers (students) are attracted to them and to make money. The making money incentive part is what keeps quality high in a competitive, free enterprise system. That is one of the main reasons that our government education system is failing so bad. They get their money and students irregardless of their performance.

Your idea of what the "business" of tertiary education does is true only for the trade schools. A significant part of all respected colleges and universities is that they also do ground breaking research that produces new knowledge. This work is not cheap. Much of this new research produces negative or null results that must be very well documented so that people can learn what and why things happened. This scenario does expand our knowledge, but it does not produce anything that will produce revenue for the researcher or the institute that funded them. The other dominant research that happens is people duplicating other's work to validate the original discoverer's research. This necessary research is less expensive but often does not provide any possibility for revenue for the verifying research facility. On rare occasions a promising avenue of research that instead of finding the anticipated new nuance in existing theory just verifies existing theory to higher degrees of accuracy than could be measured previously. This experimental success is an absolute failure in finding anything new that wasn't known before. Lastly there's the coveted new wrinkle in knowledge that produces some insight that can produce a net revenue for the institute if they can find some way to market this knowledge.

This is the heart of why academia can be expensive. But it is how we grow.

There are a few people who can opt to home educate as you have chosen. Even in your case, I do believe the state is still involved by standardizing what you as a home instructor teach your kids. It is the states responsibility to be involved or we could all end up with Taliban-type rote schools (tribal). That type of education has nothing to do with raising responsible citizens.

Are you advocating that all public schools be scraped for parent education only? That would be very dangerous. Many families cannot do it for financial reasons (working parents) or even capability. That does not mean that the parents should not be involved, they sure as hell should. However, I think the state needs to be involved by assuring all its (capable) citizens are educated fundamentally. They provide the funding (albeit tax money) for infrastructure, teachers, and governance. In first world countries we owe it to the young to have the opportunity to learn. As an investment, the state stands to gain in many ways. It is the disparity between third world and first world education that needs to be addressed. Education is real empowerment that cannot be withdrawn once delivered.

I'm not advocating that all schools that aren't "Homeschools" should be scraped. I'm just saying it isn't the responsibility of the state to do it. What have you ever known that the state does well and to the benefit of all it tries to serve? Who best decides what the curriculum should look like and what it takes to be a successful contributor in our society? Like Ronald Reagan said, "the most feared words you will ever hear when there is a knock at your door is to hear is 'hi, I'm from the government and I'm here to help you". I think that I am much better suited to know what will my kids will need to live life successfully and that doesn't mean necessarily money and notoriety etc., it means that they are able to provide for themselves and those that they are interdependent with in our society.

If you look at the homeschooling movement; it is growing dramatically because more and more people are coming to realize the inadequacy of the state to properly educate it's young citizens to operate well in this everchanging society.

"Even in your case, I do believe the state is still involved by standardizing what you as a home instructor teach your kids." The state does have a general requirement for the amount of time spent on the basics. The advantage that we have in homeschooling is that we pick the context/viewpoint in which those general subjects are taught and presented in. There are some programs that some states or bureaucracies that offer some equipment or curriculum but most of us don't want any part of them because along with those "benefits" come strings that would make us subserviant to those states.

You're right in the statement that "many families can't afford to do the educating" of their kids on a full time basis. But regardless of whether they do it all or at least are highly involved with what is happening at government/private/parochial school it is a proven fact that kids do much better in any of those environments when the parents are involved. If they can't "afford it", maybe many should decide which has greater value, the welfare of their kids or the money that is spent on inconsequential things.

The statement about whether the parents are "capable" to do the job isn't an accurate statement. This is a pretty common objection, but the fact is is that there is so many different types of curriculum that can be picked and adjusted to the learning style of the kids in a very small teacher - student ratio where not a lot of time is wasted because of class and schedule disruption. That isn't to say that homeschooling is a perfect environment, there are some kids that should be in a different setting because the parents aren't doing a good job because of a number of factors, but I would dare say that there are more unqualified people, with letters behind their name, that are just as incapable of handling and teaching a class of 20 - 30 kids.

Historically, the state (well technically the massachusetts bay colony, took that responsibility for education as a common society task in order to defend against the ' old deluder '- satan:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_School_Laws

I learned this when I visited the restored blast furnace outside of boston, and they showed how laborers kids and the owners kids were all given same education.

As our family has successfully homeschooled our brood and seen them perform well at some pretty good schools, I would just like to add that home schooling expense is the least issue. The state did not dictate our curriculum (in either ohio nor georgia) but Ohio reviewed our textbook list, and georgia required an attendance report. in ohio we had a licensed teacher do our kids 'portfolio review" to show progress.

Our kids did do standardized testing with their peers at the schools. I won't bore you with the details. They were positive.

The main issue as I saw it was having parental discipline and process to assure material was covered . those of us who had such a process thrived. Those parents who thought they could put off studies anonther day taught their kids something we didnt teach ours- procrastination and bad habits.

Milo

Milo

You're correct about the early schools in the Colonies. It is also interesting to see the text books that were used, among them being the Bible as a source for literature, principles, history, reading, etc. If our current education system, and society in general, hadn't strayed so far from what it is supposed to be doing we would see much more success in education and a lot less problems. If parents were more involved and supported what the schools, providing they are worthy of being supported, were trying to accomplish in regard to education and to control the behavior of the students, there would be a lot less trouble. When I was growing up if I got in trouble, spanked or some other form of discipline, I could be sure my parents would know about it and I would have to face/feel that discipline again. There are way too many parents that won't let "Johnny/Susie" be accountable for their actions and empower their bad behavior.

There aren't any easy solutions to fixing the education process. There are way too many variables that need adjusting. Each individual parent has to decide how their kids get educated. The parents have the responsibility and are the final authority, not the state or especially some teacher union. Too many parents have abdicated that responsibility because they have been led to believe that the government schools or some private school will do all the teaching or that they just "don't have time" to know what is going on in school. Maybe if they would turn off the stinking boob tube they would have plenty of time to spend with the one asset they have that has true value, their kids.

I know and understand hard work to better oneself. I have no doubt most of the CR4ers on this thread are similarly indoctrinated with a good work ethic. I am neither for nor against home schooling or state schooling. I am sure we could list a host of plus/minus issues.

I am concerned with OP's despair at the ability to receive an education. There is a wide disparity in rich and poor if you are a slumdog from Mumbai compared to a poor American or Canadian with lots of available support from the state for advanced education. The opportunities are not anywhere near equal in the societies. Most of the arguments are centered on the ability to get what you want just by working hard. True in the west but in many third world countries you work hard just to survive. I suspect homeschooling is all but impossible in such circumstance.

I am not sure where Pandu is from but his plight should not be taken lightly if he is from such a slum. I envisioned a parent desperately looking for a sign of hope for his children. Perhaps if OP would open up and tell us more we could work out a way to resolve his despair. I suggest something of an individual promise to Pandu to educate his kids so that we could give him hope. It would appear he wants to not just be given fish but to learn how to fish. If someone is reaching out, it is incumbent on us to respond as citizens of the world. If we can drag Pandu and his family out of the slum and provide a degree of hope, we will all be better as humans.

On the other hand if he is just looking for a free handout and lives in the west, I suggest he meet with councilors at the school of choice. I am sure there exist grants or loans to assist him?her. We could help in either case.

I completely agree. I wish that Pandu would return with some kind, any kind of a comment. There are ways that anyone can better themselves.

I do realize how lucky I am to have been born where I was born. Had I been born in many other places (a Mumbai slum-dog), I probably would have never seen my second birthday. But I and nobody here can change the past, we can only play the cards that life has given us. I wished I could say that hard work will always be rewarded, but we all know that fate can be cruel. Giving up will always lead to failure. Raging against one's circumstance though can be cathartic and focusing, so long as we don't wallow in depression. I hope that this was just Pandu's venting rage to focus.

Hopefully, Pandu has been able to read this jumbled collection of our silly comments, personal triumphs, economic dogma and words of encouragement.

I wish you, Pandu, all the luck and emotional drive you will need to get the education you desire.

Mr Pandu, I really do not agree with you on several counts:

-There is no middle class anymore. ^^^^It exists everywhere.

-The rich people can get a decent education and have decent lives. ^^^Not all rich are getting decent education.

-Is it really that important not to teach the poor??? ^^^Can you imagine, how much money in India is spent for giving apportunities to poor & reserving seats for them at nigligible cost.

Some one said "If there is will, there is a way." It applies for higher eduation also up to a great extent. People are learning for higher degrees while earning. One more thing I would like to say that for becoming rich, higher or decent education is not the only way, it is one of the many ways. A shear common sense, grabbing the available apportunities, doing right things at right time, positive attitude, thinking BIG and good friend circle are few of the other ways of becoming rich. Can I give example of Late Sri Dhiru Bhai Ambani, archtect of Relience Empire.

Pandu -- Don't pay any attention to the cynics. Check out the website below. A diligent and sincere person ready to invest his/her own time can get a huge start on a college level education with little or no monetary investment save writing materials/ computer resources needed to create necessary reference notes.

http://www.khanacademy.org/

Unfortunately most of the world places a high value on credentials from institutions who must extract a substantial amount of money and/or place a high scholastic aptitude threshold on their students in order to grant such credentials. This is the true barrier you face. It has only a sideways relationship to your level of knowledge.

Khan is in the van of changing all that. The Internet is the real future of higher education. This thing about the "one on one" interaction of student and teacher may make sense in the primary grades, but beyond that it is nothing but a bunch of nostalgic and self-serving rubbish.

I predict that in the lifetime of many of us access to truly free higher education will be a fact. The historic reliance by employers on the horrifically expensive degree granted by a university that does little more than screen potential employees will change. These businesses will come to realize the savings to be achieved by doing their own testing and qualification of employees who have invested only their own time and effort in their education. They won't have to be paid high salaries to compensate them for the high monetary cost of a typical university education of today that seems to exist for little more than the glorification of an educated elite.

Rough inflammatory words? Yes. The knowledge is out there recorded in the written word and gradually being made available to all via the new world library, the Internet. The time has come for the world to emerge from the gray age of ignorance that we live in and emerge into the light of wisdom and knowledge.

Ed Weldon

GA Ed. Very interesting site, thanks for the lead.

Kevin

Many rich people are uneducated - they are street-wise enough to realise at an early age that the best way to make money is to find some poor sod who has been educated and exploit their talents - engineers are a good example.

Anything wrong with that?

If the engineer is not smart enough to look out for himself then more power to the exploiter.

I read all the remarks and found some interesting,some annoying and some funny. This was by far the most moving blog and I feel this is what living the American dream is all about. My day started out a little slow. This reply put a little spark in my day and this is why I like this web site. Thanks...I know I expect to be trashed for being too sappy!

In America for sure, the teachers (or Professors) have come to demand a certain style of life, which should not be unexpected.

Education is open for aspirants seeking knowledge and bears no much strings to poverty or richness. It is all about how we apply our knowledge gained out of education.

Edison was not formally educated but his mere efforts took him to great heights.

Education facilitates knowledge and never guarantees prosperity. Efforts are more worthy than mere degrees.

Amen,

Age thinking says "get a good education, get a good secure job with a large company and you'll be set for life."

I heard this repeatedly from my Dad, he also added the, " Holy Grail", of what I should shoot for in salary......$10,000 US per year. My, my how things change.....

Good post

Yes, The rule was earn your age in thousands , then earn twice your age in thousands, then 3X, then, ...well it wasn't thousands any more...

Milo

Some cultures like to use education as a tool to separate the rich and poor as you say, but others see it as a tool to break down the barriers. It seems pretty clear to me that getting a good education has real economic benefits for both the individual and the society. But different cultures have different mythologies and patterns of thought.

I happen to live in the US, and here it seems that one of the dominant thought patterns is that if you didn't sweat blood to get something, you won't value it very highly. So in our own way we believe that giving people a good education makes them weak, but charging them a small fortune for it is actually doing them a favor. Learned corners of our society (such as this forum) are full of folks who will be happy to tell you how hard they struggled to get an education, and how that has made them a better person. Since there are element of economic and moral truth to this argument, and an army of folks eager to make it, this view tends to get a lot of attention. Since the US economy has needed (at least until recently) large numbers of low skill workers, the idea that education is a 'luxury' available only to those willing and able to pay for it has had political and financial support in many business sectors. Now that these low skill jobs have left the US, the economic basis for 'rationing' education may be gone, but the emotional argument is still strongly ingrained.

My understanding is that in Northern Europe there is a different pattern of thought, that stresses the benefit of high education levels to the general well being of the society. They therefore tend to offer low cost or free college education, and they seem to think that a glut of virtuoso guitarists is a small price to pay for an army of well trained engineers and programmers. Based on current evidence I think they may have the better side of the argument, but then again I don't really think logic and reason play a very big part in this.

For those of us in the developed world, with leisure time and broad band internet access, it is quite possible to educate oneself in a number of subjects (generally not lab sciences). But it is also easy to fill our heads with nonsense and misinformation. At some level, bricks & mortar and human teachers seem to be required. For those in the poor or developing world, who may have to spend much of their limited spare time waiting in line at an internet cafe, educating oneself is a whole lot harder. So depending on your stance on the public/private benefits of education, you can either rejoice that in spite of the odds against them some people from poor backgrounds will triumph, or you can despair at the enormous human potential that is going to waste.

As far as educators banding together to provide free high quality on-line education, I think this is already happening. I have heard for example that pretty much all of the math course material from MIT is available free on the internet, and many parallel forums have been set up for individual help and questions.

Are you willing to give away all you have learned through study and experience to anyone for free? If so maybe you should start out this online community. The problem is that colleges offer a service, people pay for them. The price people are willing to pay for the service is dictated by there willingness to pay for this service. People are too hung up on the "Chivas Regal effect". Now, these colleges are willing to charge this, because people are willing to pay for it. Than, colleges get hot shot teachers (in theory) who receive good pay for their knowledge. What I am basically saying is that this is not an education problem, it´s merely financial common sense. If there is an institution that is willing to pay for my knowledge, and I agree with the salary, high or low, why give it away?

Well stated. GA

Care for a sandwich?

Awwww..... He must have hit a nerve. All of a sudden you're willing to share your big platter of sandwiches.....very commendable.

dkwarner, russ123,mizuto,redfred kramarat, et al;

Thank you.

I appreciate the offer, of the sandwich, but I have already eaten lunch today. Thanks for your generous offer.

I think that this is reall ywhat CR4 can be about, helping people "get it" about what we do.

Thanks for the GA - it may make my answer easier for people to see.

All of us have a professional pride or spirit. Thisis agreat place to lead and teach by example.

In a positive manner. Thanks for the encouragement.

And the sandwich.

Milo They told me there was no such thing as free lunch

Free lunch, what free lunch. You've earned it.

Well put Milo - you got my GA

One more GA!

I have reached the point in life where much to most of my teaching is now unpaid, and when I do get paid, the fee definitely depends on the student's ability to pay. I have always been willing to put in extra time for those who truly wanted to learn, and I expect that to continue until I can no longer contribute.

Fortunately I now get paid for most of my 'engineering', so I can afford to teach without pay.

Firstly no education is free. Even if teachers band together to offer their wisdom, experience, curriculum, etc. it costs something....it may not cost the person getting the education but it either costs the tax payers, the teachers or someone else.

Secondly, I see the two extremes being mentioned (rich/poor, expensive/free) but no mention of the in between. Post high school education in the US can be affordable. I am not referring to self education through the internet (which is usually not free as one needs a computer and internet access which generally costs something) or a library, but an education via an accredited institution offering the potential graduate some credentials that will be beneficial to them as they try to convince someone to hire them. While some universities and colleges are very expensive essentially requiring a wealthy parent or benefactor, the US has a very extensive range of community colleges and state universities which are quite affordable relative to the high priced ones.

When I graduated high school I wanted to go to a particular school with a tuition of $70 per credit hour for undergraduate courses. As my family was below middle class economically speaking, there was no way I could afford to attend, so I chose the local community college with a tuition of only $14 per credit hour. Later I attended a state university which was also within my ability to afford by working and taking out a some small loans.

A GA from me. Your statements come from someone with real world experience, that was able to overcome the hardships. Welcome aboard!

I think it's been fairly well established here, that nothing is truly free. Everything has a cost. Thanks for your input.

What you do for yourself is just body maintenance and self improvement. What you do for others is what counts.

My guiding philosophy. Not any where near perfectly embodied in myself; but I work at it. Hopefully more of us can do better than me.

Ed Weldon

In bold none the less! Not my philosophy but fine for you.

Sorry for the bold lettering. I didn't mean to shout. It was a cut and paste from another document and I was in a bit of a hurry to finish the post. .......Ed Weldon

THIS IS SHOUTING , you're fine

And they say all men are born equal. B******T.

Why should a band of teachers get together to teach for free and, effectively cut they're own throats. Your imagining an Utopian society, that does'nt exist that will never exist, as long as there's money (to be made). Get real, cough up the bucks and make of it what you will. So if you had your free education, you'd then go out and give your services for free would you?

pandu, like it or not nothing is for free - as has been rightly pointed out by many posters. However, you need to make the distinction between an education and a qualification - the two are different. I know many educated people that have no qualifications to their name. However, to get onto the "better" employment ladder, generally speaking, you need to have a Qualification.

Your question "Is it really that important not to teach the poor???" is quite interesting. The survival of the Western world standards depends on the poor uneducated masses -after all who else is going to make our Nike runners, our Adidas T-shirts and the cheap and disposable items that we use everyday. If the poor uneducated masses were educated then they would realize that they are being taken advantage of and things would most likely change for the Western world -this is currently happening in China where wage costs are on the increase. I remember reading something (can't remember from whom) that went along the lines of "that a government would prefer to have a mass of uneducated unemployed people as opposed to having a mass of educated unemployed people". The reason being that the government could feed the uneducated masses crap and stay in power - again it comes down to greed I suppose. How many of the third world countries are run by greedy governments who are just in it for themselves?

GA from me.

And when wartime comes it's better to have uneducated masses, for cannon fodder.

Considering that I live in a 3rd world country (Guatemala, south of Mexico) I listen to the masses claiming for free education, free housing, free health care, free women, free beer so on and so on.

What people don´t understand is that free means someone else has to pay for it. For the people using the free service, many don´t even accomplish getting through the process (in education it would be graduating). All the money spent for this service is then thrown away.

What is more ridiculuous is that even teachers paid by the government to give the so called free service (all union workers of course), riot all the time claiming that people can´t pay for education so the government has to (People have the right to education). They also speak about quality of education and how this issue has to be resolved. These "teachers" are so into their act that they riot and demand things, but do you know where the children of these teachers study: IN PRIVATE (paid) SCHOOLS. The hipocrasy.

It sounds like you are exactly the kind of motivated person who SHOULD pursue higher education. You can prove to all those trust fund babies that you are equal if not beter than them. And once you realize that "rich" people are for the most part ignorami with a lot of self confidence, you can over achieve, become rich and take over the world...and after you work hard to make all of your masses of wealth, lets talk again about giving it all away.

So who is going to pay the teachers ?

will you work for nothing ?

and if your going to use taxes to pay for education who decides how much of other peoples money you use.

if the poor dont pay taxes then they wont be entitled to receive the benifits unles the tax payers get some sort of return for the money they are being forced to pay.

It all boils down to money.

unless education can be supplied by barter, ie i will train you if you give me food, water , fire wood ,etc or some sort of incentive to provide the education for nothing

There are some great people out there that have put themselves into you tube videos and podcasts, and made them available to all. Time will tell, but I think there is a positive future for this kind of critical thinking. The rest of us have to fully support these "teachers". T Y

Children who learn to play and sing and dance at an early age, are able to put things into perspective. but music and art and dancing have been taken from our children by "union schools" who think it's more important To teach "social skills" and gender identification. To sing and play and dance your way through life is real wisdom, and knowledge comes in a natural way. You play a piano, you don't work a piano. "Life is not a journey, and we're supposed to sing and dance". A.W.

absolutely agree

Hi, I agree with you on this point, only then the question becomes where to take money for teachers for their own life, or maybe they will organize a community in which each of them will devote only enough free time to live
and something else I think sites like this can help with a professional approach in preparing work of any complexity

Not the social but the sociopath approach is the model you talk about. And it has been winning more and more of the world.