this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2023
115 points (71.4% liked)

Asklemmy

43835 readers
677 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This would save young Americans from going into crippling debt, but it would also make a university degree completely unaffordable for most. However, in the age of the Internet, that doesn't mean they couldn't get an education.

Consider the long term impact of this. There are a lot of different ways such a situation could go, for better and for worse.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The sad part about relying on scholarships is that disadvantaged kids are much less likely to have excellent grades. These people need school more than anyone else. The system works backwards.

[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's a fair point, where I live we have a point system for entry and you get the majority of your points through your grades. You also get points if you're economically disadvantaged and some other factors like certain disabilities, if I remember correctly.

It seems from the outside that a systematic change would indeed be a good idea, not something that would just help the poor but address the root cause of why people become poor in the first place.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I personally believe that society in general should be healthy and educated. If your citizens aren't sick and/or dumb, there's a higher likelihood of the country as a whole having a better economy with a higher quality of life. Besides, it's just good for humanity to treat sick people and educate those who are trying to contribute to society.

I don't believe that there should be an individual cost for these items. I don't think that a rich person should be healthy while a poor person remains sick or worse. I also don't think that a rich person should have a great education while a poor person stays held back from not being able to afford school. In my opinion, this economic disparity doesn't make sense.

It does make sense that a rich person might live in a large house while a poor person lives in a quaint apartment, or a rich person has a PlayStation while a poor person may not have one. In the US, your health and your education is in the same market as PlayStations. To me, this doesn't make sense at all.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Exactly this. I grew up poor and didn't have a quiet place to study. My grades suffered greatly as a result, and a number of other reasons. I needed education for upward mobility.

After struggling to get an education, finally in my 30s I eas able to get out of poverty.