• money_loo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Do they?

            School supplies and materials?

            Costs of transportation?

            Extracurricular activities?

            Uniforms or dress codes?

            Costs to eat?

            Tutoring costs because your kid is in public school?

            Technology access requirements for the modern world like tablets or computers with specific often paid software?

            Field trips and special projects?

            I dunno, it’s all starting to add up to a little more than free.

            • mateomaui@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Unless you want the kids to grow up to be completely undeniably stupid, education has to happen at some point. Babysitters aren’t trained for or paid enough for that. Teachers aren’t paid enough for that.

              Also all the costs you’re adding up are still nothing in comparison to having to pay a babysitter a livable hourly wage for 40+ hours a week, and then still have to feed and clothe the kids etc because the babysitter isn’t covering that for you out of their own pay.

              So yes, on the point alone that you don’t have to personally employ someone on a full-time basis and pay them out of your own pocket just to make sure your kid doesn’t burn the house down while you’re gone, it is cheaper.

              Don’t want to incur such costs? Don’t have kids that you have to do something with during the day.

              • money_loo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Nobody’s denying that teachers keeping an eye on your kid slightly at school will prevent them from burning your house down, only that believing that’s the sole purpose of the teacher is asinine and so stupid it makes my brain hurt.

                The people saying that obviously felt that way themselves in school and didn’t take it seriously. And it shows now.

                • mateomaui@reddthat.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  He didn’t say “sole purpose”, he said “main job” in the context of what the typical lowest common denominator parent these days expects first from a school just so they can go to work. “Main job” implies there are other jobs teachers do that those same parents don’t consider as important as just keeping their kids busy so they can work. Perhaps you should read the post more carefully to avoid arguing against something that wasn’t argued in the first place.