• 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.

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

                    It’s ok to be too stupid to understand the point he’s actually making. No one expects you to get past your shortsighted interpretation of the argument.