Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!ll-xn!mit-amt!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh
From: mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz)
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: Re: Population control & Freedom
Message-ID: <1149@cybvax0.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 15-Sep-86 17:40:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: cybvax0.1149
Posted: Mon Sep 15 17:40:13 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 17-Sep-86 07:23:00 EDT
References: <3013@watmath.UUCP> <11700392@inmet>
Reply-To: mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz)
Organization: Cybermation, Inc., Cambridge, MA
Lines: 75

You know, I often get the feeling that everybody must "n" past Jan's
articles, because nobody nails him on the howlers near the end.

In article <11700392@inmet> janw@inmet.UUCP writes:
[100+ lines deleted... mrh]
> There is no reason why children need be a great burden on parents
> *or*  taxpayers.  A five-year old could do some kinds of work al-
> ready, and learn in the process.

What a novel idea!  Jan has invented CHORES and CHILD LABOR, for which I'm
sure generations of children to come will praise him.  And just think how
much they'll learn performing repetitive tasks instead of wasting their time
learning their 3 R's or any other such liberal bunk.

> School years are mostly wasted, for poor kids and rich kids, too.
> The  12-year  course,  properly  taught, need take no more than 2
> years. (I'd undertake to do it in 18 months,  working  full-time
> with one pupil - and beat the SAT of the average school products).

While some portion of the school years are wasted, the solution is to
teach more in the course, not merely to shrink the time spent.  The two
year claim is absurd.  At what age does Jan propose to teach for two years?
An average student?  Give us a break.  If this was practical, we'd see lots
more 15 year olds (or younger) from private schools entering college.

> Abolish most welfare, abolish  public  schools,  abolish  minimum
> wage;   permit  child  labor  under  healthy  conditions.  Create
> (privately) a network of apprentice schools where kids  would  be
> paid  a  little, and fed, and taught. Let charities chip in where
> the parents can't; but that may not be needed. Industries  will
> likely  jump  at the chance to have a workforce tailored to their
> needs many years in advance, meanwhile doing something useful.

We used to have that.  Among other things, it included migrant labor.
I'm sure those farmers and industrialists were plenty interested in
spending all the money they saved by hiring children on educating the
children.  Right.  :-(

> Kids will be *needed*.  Get rid  of  race  prejudice  interfering
> with adoption of minority kids. Babies are needed, too.

This reminds me of a Monty Python sketch about how to solve the problem
of world disease.  "Become a doctor, discover something really important
so that people really listen to you, etc...."  I had no idea you were
such a Utopian, Jan.

> The problem is not inequality, but lack of social  mobility.

Return to a system of apprenticeship is going to alleviate a lack of
social mobility?  Our current society probably has the least barriers to
social mobility of any historical society.

> As we are graduating into a post-industrial era, a part of our popu-
> lation is stuck and unable to adapt. It is  *not*  a  matter  of
> their getting too little, or too much, of the pie. The problem is
> qualitative, it is one of skills, incentives and role models. And
> of intermediate steps; a family does not have to make it  in  one
> generation.  What's  wrong with this progress report: grandmother
> on welfare, mother a  cleaning  lady,  daughter  an  electrician,
> granddaughter an engineer?

What's wrong is that two generations have missed out on their potential
for no good reason.  Perhaps you've progressed too fast for your family,
Jan.  Care to go back to the old village as a peasant?  (Or whatever lowly
position is appropriate for your ancestry.)

For someone who's concerned with social mobility, your idea of stretching
it out over four or more generations is a cop out.  Why should anyone with
potential be slowed down?  The real problem is that for long periods of
time, "free market" mechanisms like prejudice, bigotry, child labor, etc.
don't merely "slow down" social mobility: they lock large numbers of people
into cycles of poverty and repression.
-- 

Mike Huybensz		...decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh