🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <9301091155@drktowr.chi.il.us> magus@drktowr.chi.il.us (Louis Giliberto) writes:
>But education costs money...

True enough, but money is only a small part of the problem.  There is
no motivation for children to learn.  A sad fact of life in Chicago is
that kids who do well in school are ostracized by their peers.  Why
should they learn?  How many role models do children have available
that emphasize the importance of a good education?  From the point of
view of the students who even bother attending school, the road to
success is paved through excellence in athletics, not academics.

Contrary to popular belief, education is the primary
responsibility of the parent(s), not the school.  The school is
merely a tool to be used by the parent, and like any tool,
serves little useful function when used incorrectly.
The problem is that the parents don't get involved in their children's
education; many of the public schools in Chicago serve only as
free day care for the parents.

If that weren't enough, there is no motivation for teachers to perform
well.  Between the Chicago Teachers Union and the tenure laws in the
state, it is damn near impossible to have a teacher fired.
Incompetence is not an easy thing to eradicate, especially in
the Chicago public school system.

No amount of money is going to solve any of these problems.
These are social problems and cannot be solved until there is a
change in society.

>Daley had it on paper (which is something
>most politicians never do) that x amount would go straight into
>the education fund.

All of which was based upon some imaginary number presented as 
the projected revenue of the casino.  There's no substanstive
proof that the casino will live up the dreams of its crusaders.
Should it not, what happens then?

Cheers,
    -Ken K
-- 
Ken Konecki
e-mail:kenk@sdc.com    -or-    ...!uunet!tellab5!sdc!kenk
"Getting an inch of snow is like winning 10 cents in the lottery"