undefined | Better HN

0 pointsgreentxt1y ago0 comments

I don't think an illiterate populous is the alternative unless you think most people lack intrinsic motivation and also have families that don't value education. Seems extremely unlikely. Maybe you wouldn't have gone to school if you had a choice but most people would, if nothing else for free childcare.

0 comments

lyu072821y ago

> most people would

You are missing the point, "most" is not all, I don't think most people/families are like this at all, we don't do this for most people. I think you would be surprised about the number of low-income children in the US who will never see a classroom if we abandoned compulsory education. It is also an effective measure to increase equality and class mobility.

14 million children in the US are food insecure. 43 million people live in poverty, 12.9% [1]

You know how many people in the US are illiterate? 21% [2]

Do you think that number will increase or decrease if we got rid of compulsory education?

[1] https://www.nokidhungry.org/who-we-are/hunger-facts [2] https://www.thenationalliteracyinstitute.com/post/literacy-s...

9rx1y ago

> You know how many people in the US are illiterate? 21% [2] Do you think that number will increase or decrease if we got rid of compulsory education?

Just 20% in 1875[1], despite the primitive education system of the time. Is the answer no change, it being limited by the innate capabilities of the people, not limited by what they do?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States

Miraste1y ago

The source above yours and the one on Wikipedia are using different metrics for literacy. These are generally not comparable. Measuring literacy in a useful way, especially over historic timescales, is harder than it sounds.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse