Poverty rate by city data for Massachusetts

[Partial Observer]

Originally Posted by Boston_Burbs

What I dont get is.. where are the parents in all of this? Allowing your kids to go into massive debt? I doubt you got that debt from a state school.

I can't speak for everyone, but I had a full scholarship as an undergrad. My $100K in debt is from law school. I had a $16K/year scholarship, but the cost of attendance was around $50K/year. My wife got scholarships as well, but still owes $100K from 7 years of college.

Our parents weren't in a position to help financially. And in 2000, when we graduated from high school, or 2004, when we were graduating from college, no one told us that the economy would tank in 2008. Hindsight is 20/20.

As for the public versus private debate, I'd just note that the costs of in-state tuition are rising to keep pace with private schools. They don't need to be cheap - just cheapER. And as long as the federal government is in the business of issuing what are basically subprime loans to anyone and everyone, education costs will continue to rise.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by in_newengland

Class segregation? They're already got that. They need to be given the same opportunities as rich people who can send their kids to private school. Small classes, good teachers, role models, quality education.

I don't think you've taught in a public school or you would know what I'm talking about and not distort what I am saying.

We all self-segregate along socioeconomic lines already. If you make $250K per year, you're not going to buy a house in a city with a failed school system. You are going to pick the town with the best public schools. You may then opt for private schools if you have the cash to fund it. I have lots of friends who did all that.

Personally, I think that engaged, smart, college educated, affluent parents with smart children will have a successful outcome no matter where the children go to school. You could send them to the schools in the cities I listed with 20%+ poverty rates and they'd likely still do fine in life. We're violently agreeing on the role parenting plays and it's pretty clear the school system is less important than nurturing parents who provide an enriched environment for their children.

[CaseyB]

True, but they are heavily influenced by their peers. That's what concerns parents more than the actual school.

[UKWildcat1981]

I was surprised to see Wellesley and Weston didn't make the list lol

[mdovell]

" And in 2000, when we graduated from high school, or 2004, when we were graduating from college, no one told us that the economy would tank in 2008. Hindsight is 20/20."

Well I graduated high school in '98 and frankly the writing was on the wall in 2000 with the dot com bubble. Meridith Whitney, Bill Gross, Mohammad Alberian (both of Pimco), Peter Schiff, Nourial Roubini etc. A fair amount did call it

"And as long as the federal government is in the business of issuing what are basically subprime loans to anyone and everyone, education costs will continue to rise.


That's pretty much it although I will say that online education can change things.

[G1..]

Originally Posted by in_newengland

Some discipline and role models would help them. It is not criminalizing them. To establish rules to follow and to give them some special attention that they are not getting at home would help them. That they aren't getting what they need at home is evident by their classroom behavior. A struggling single mother cannot usually give them all that they need, children with alcoholic parents or abusive parents--most would be better off getting after school supervision rather than being sent home to the same negative environment. Those who are totally out of control should be sent away (something that is already done in some cases.) Many of them (and I know from experience) run away from home anyway and don't want to be with their dysfunctional parents. A residential school that they could attend would remove them from the toxic home environment and at least give them a chance. They are not necessarily bad kids if they are given a chance.

Class segregation? They're already got that. They need to be given the same opportunities as rich people who can send their kids to private school. Small classes, good teachers, role models, quality education.

I don't think you've taught in a public school or you would know what I'm talking about and not distort what I am saying.

I don't know how long you have lived in New England but from your attitude you sound like one of the people who should be held responsible for one of the worst education decisions in the US history ,the busing of children into South Boston High school,I was in college then just outside of Boston and whom ever made that call should be in jail .

[CaseyB]

Originally Posted by G1..

I don't know how long you have lived in New England but from your attitude you sound like one of the people who should be held responsible for one of the worst education decisions in the US history ,the busing of children into South Boston High school,I was in college then just outside of Boston and whom ever made that call should be in jail .

It was Judge Garrity.

[Partial Observer]

Originally Posted by mdovell

" And in 2000, when we graduated from high school, or 2004, when we were graduating from college, no one told us that the economy would tank in 2008. Hindsight is 20/20."

Well I graduated high school in '98 and frankly the writing was on the wall in 2000 with the dot com bubble. Meridith Whitney, Bill Gross, Mohammad Alberian (both of Pimco), Peter Schiff, Nourial Roubini etc. A fair amount did call it

"And as long as the federal government is in the business of issuing what are basically subprime loans to anyone and everyone, education costs will continue to rise.


That's pretty much it although I will say that online education can change things.

The writing may have been on the wall before 2000, but I'm not sure it was big and bold enough for most people to read. How many high school students do you think would have been able to name a single person on that list, much less look to that group for career counseling?

My main point (which is certainly open to debate) is that pursuing the best and highest education possible will not necessarily lead to the type of lifestyle that incentivizes people to break the poverty cycle. My wife and I were dumb kids following dumb advice, and we certainly weren't alone. We listened to our teachers and guidance counselors, not Mohammad Alberian, et al. Furthermore, encouraging the lowest socioeconomic classes to simply graduate from high school and earn just enough to stay above the poverty line will not break the cycle either.

I blame the fact that our society overvalues work that does not actually add any value at all -- such as investment banking. Meanwhile, we undervalue "ditch-diggers" because, frankly, so many people are capable of doing those jobs. Heck, we even outsource ditch-digging to countries that don't even pretend to care about human rights. Those savings don't trickle down to the folks living in Lynn, Lawrence, Lowell, New Bedford, Chicopee, or any of the places that are the topic of this discussion.

[in_newengland]

Originally Posted by Partial Observer

The writing may have been on the wall before 2000, but I'm not sure it was big and bold enough for most people to read. How many high school students do you think would have been able to name a single person on that list, much less look to that group for career counseling?

My main point (which is certainly open to debate) is that pursuing the best and highest education possible will not necessarily lead to the type of lifestyle that incentivizes people to break the poverty cycle. My wife and I were dumb kids following dumb advice, and we certainly weren't alone. We listened to our teachers and guidance counselors, not Mohammad Alberian, et al. Furthermore, encouraging the lowest socioeconomic classes to simply graduate from high school and earn just enough to stay above the poverty line will not break the cycle either.

I blame the fact that our society overvalues work that does not actually add any value at all -- such as investment banking. Meanwhile, we undervalue "ditch-diggers" because, frankly, so many people are capable of doing those jobs. Heck, we even outsource ditch-digging to countries that don't even pretend to care about human rights. Those savings don't trickle down to the folks living in Lynn, Lawrence, Lowell, New Bedford, Chicopee, or any of the places that are the topic of this discussion.

Agreed. It's not just education. There is a lot more to it and if someone knew what those missing factors were, there might be some hope. It does have something to do with the low value and low pay for those vocational school type of jobs but it has to do also with the parenting, the neighborhood, the other kids in school.

Different things have been tried for decades. Back in the 50s one of my favorite movies was Blackboard Jungle. Later on it was To Sir with Love. In both cases the kids were considered failures but an amazing teacher came in and laid down the law. RULES. Strict rules. The teacher got to really know the kids and mentored them. Both films had happy endings=successful, well behaved students.

In lieu of getting a perfect teacher to come in (it must be a rarity since you only see it in the movies and the schools probably wouldn't allow the teacher to lay down the law either) I can only see maybe having special private schools with tiny classes. The kids would live at the school and be supervised. That gets them out of the bad environment (neighborhood or parents, whatever.) But I have no idea how this could be done or whether it would really work.

In other words, the entire problem needs to be addressed, not just the education. It's an entire lifestyle that would have to be changed somehow.