Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!caip!topaz!uwvax!husc6!think!nike!lll-crg!lll-lcc!pyramid!amdahl!bnrmtv!timlee
From: timlee@bnrmtv.UUCP (Timothy Lee)
Newsgroups: net.sci,net.politics
Subject: Re: privatization of education
Message-ID: <616@bnrmtv.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 11-Aug-86 11:55:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: bnrmtv.616
Posted: Mon Aug 11 11:55:41 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 15-Aug-86 01:27:47 EDT
References: <3719@decwrl.DEC.COM> <136@cci632.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Northern Research, Mtn. View, CA
Lines: 70
Xref: watmath net.sci:1501 net.politics:18202

> > >                                                             Yes, there
> > >are kids from working class backgrounds attending University of California,
                   ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^ == everybody, according to you.  See below
> > > but the majority are from families that could afford to pay their own
> > > way.  
> > 
> > Not true.  The majority of UC students receive financial aid.
> > You do mean `lower economic class' when you say `working class', don't you?
> > But note that most `middle class' ($15K-30K / year) people must work to
> > maintain their current life style.  So `working class' is not an entirely
> > accurate term to describe to lower class.  The `non-working class', ie
> > that which does not work, composes of the welfare class and the richest.
> > 
> 
> Hmmm.  First you say, "The majority of UC students receive financial aid,"
> as a way of suggesting that the students come from families that are
> struggling financially.  Then you define 'middle class' as $15K-30K/year,

I didn't say `struggling financially', I said `receive financial aid'.
This means that they would have trouble paying their own way through college.

> which by California payscales is lower middle class, then you say that
> "'middle class' ... people must work to maintain their current life
> style," presumably to keep up the payments on the Winnebago.  Those of
						    ^^^^^^^^^ ???
Did you, as a `lower middle class' person, have a Winnebago?

> us who grew up lower middle class find your definitions highly specious.
> 
> Your definition of 'non-working class' is pretty questionable also.
> Welfare includes a lot of working poor, and there are very wealthy
> people who work -- and work hard.  (Probably more than there are of
> the "idle rich".)

Ever know a person in the `middle class' who doesn't work (for more than a
few months) without becoming `lower class' eventually?
By `welfare class' I meant those whose main source of income is welfare payments
The current welfare system is a disincentive to work for the poorest; their
benefits are often cut by more than they would earn.  I AM NOT AGAINST
HELPING THE POOR, only I want to see the poor helped so that they are not
dependent on government handouts.
How about those who inherited their wealth?
In any case, you just said that `working class' means just about everybody.

> 
> Sounds like definitions designed to justify the status quo.
> 
Did I say so?

> > > Second, remember that the requirements of UC (and most other good
> > > schools) make it unlikely that kids from economically deprived back-
> > > grounds will be able to enter.  Even if allowed in under special
> > > admission policies, many, if not most, are inadequately prepared for
> > > UC, and drop out within the first year.  THEIR INADEQUATE PREPARATION
> > > IS PARTLY EARLIER EDUCATION, AND PARTLY THE CULTURAL DEPRIVATION OF
> > > GROWING UP POOR.
> > 
> > That means that one should try to remedy those problems.  Politicians are
> > reluctant to address those problems since the payoff will come about 12
> > years later, when a successor can claim credit for what the original
> > politician did.
> 
> Actually, politicians ignore people without political influence --
> subsidies to the middle class and above are the reason that UC seems
> to get the first pick of the budget, and California State University
> system (which is much less elitist) gets the scraps.

Naw, CSU gets lots of budget.  The CCCs are the ones who get gypped for the
reasons you just said.  But the K-12 schools get shafted for the reasons that
I said before.