Wednesday, June 21, 2017

Another Case for Stay At Home Parents: The Elimination of Schools


Of the many statistics and calculations I ran for my latest essay, perhaps the most interesting one is that:

after going to college for 4-8 years
and working hard to get that coveted non-profit or government position
and after putting in 10 years of work to make your career a go

when you factor in

taxes
extra commuting costs
and especially daycare

the average woman's job brings home a big, huge, whopping extra....

$4,000.

Never mind your kids are ill-reared.
Never mind you never got time to spend with your kids anyway.
Never mind divorce is all but guaranteed.
And never mind the tragic irony that many women's careers are simply taking care of anybody else's kids but their own
Nor the doubly rich irony that your labor is now taxed on what was previously untaxable labor

Nope, that Masters is Social Work, pending divorce, broken family, wasted youth, and children that will grow to hate you was totally worth it because...well, dude...come on!  THAT'S $4,000!!!!

Now admittedly it's not always the woman working her pittance of a make-work government affirmative action job at the expense of her family.  Often times it is the woman who is obvious breadwinner and there's a stay at home dad.  Often times there are traditional families where one person stays at home to (GASP!) raise their children and the other works the 9-5.  But given there's such a small financial advantage to outsourcing the rearing of your children, even in today's "hectic career obsessed world," it doesn't pay (well, OK, $4,000) to have that second income.

Dedicate one parent to stay at home.
Dedicate one person to rear your children.
And the amount you'll save in Ritalin, Adderall, and psychologist visits alone will easily recoup those precious $4,000.

But then the ole Captain got thinking again.  Specifically, about the handful of women he knows that home-school their children.  They do an infinitely better job than the public schools do.  Some of their kids are already learning to program and code at age 12.  Another one knows how to inseminate, milk, and tend cows.  And all this from stay at home moms who "shockingly" don't have degrees, certifications, or licenses.  So if for the vast majority of families it doesn't pay to have a two income household, and kids are better educated when home-schooled, would there not be a case for eliminating schools altogether?

This is not only simple logic, nor wishful right-wing thinking.  It's simple economics.

In the olden days before time saving devices such as vacuums and washing machines, being a home-keeper (male or female) was indeed a full-time job.  There was cleaning and maintenance. Rearing the children.  And one that I like to highlight in particular (because it was just as important as how much the family made) was the budgeting and spending of the family finances.  Couponing, budgeting, making meals at home.  All of that was just as important as the (traditionally) male role of being the breadwinner.

But with the advent of washing machines and vacuums, hours were freed up for your typical house-keeper.  And with the push of 1960's feminism and the commensurate outsourcing your children to day care, the (traditionally) female role of house keeper was obsoleted.  Women were to enter the workforce just like men...even if the plurality of their jobs were to effectively be government-compensated mothers to other women's children...and now you'd be taxed on it.

But add to this rapidly evolving mix of sex roles and true game changer.

The internet.

The internet not only saves households even more time in terms of shopping, banking, and a nearly limitless number of other chores.  But it also makes entire industries obsolete.

Education for example.

There is no godly reason colleges and universities should even exist anymore.  College degrees in all reality are obsolete, it's just the rest of the outdated and lethargic economy hasn't realized it.  But while the real world slowly catches on that colleges and universities are going to go the way of the dinosaur, I contend we should also turn our focus to the public schools of K-12 because they too are obsolete.

Since it only pays an extra $4,000 to have a two income household, and there is so much time freed up for the home-keeper with appliances and the internet, what if every family had a stay at home parent that would not only maintain the home, rear the children, but educate them as well?  The internet has the ENTIRE world's knowledge a fingertip away.  There are tutorials and MOOC's online that could teach you and your children literally everything the K-12 can and more.  Even Tom Woods (though the home schooling site links here) on a dare created an entire home schooling curriculum.  This would not only result in much better educated children, but in eliminating the public schools, save Americans billions in unnecessary property taxes.

Of course, I know this is politically infeasible.  There are too many people vested in their make-work-government-careers and degrees to give it up and raise their own children.  I know Big Education has a trillion-dollar per year vested interest in fleecing the taxpayer to keep up their inferior and obsolete industry.  And the democrat party alone needs public schools and universities to continue to brainwash and make future democrat voters.  There are huge political, psychological, sociological, and just plain evil hurdles to bringing about happier families and better educations to children.  But just like the internet and e-mail technically made commuting an unnecessary chore in about 1999, it doesn't mean society is fast, sharp, or visionary enough to capitalize on it.  And if commuting or the higher education bubble is any indicator, it's going to be at least three decades before the American sheeple wake up and realize K-college education can all be done at home, with a loving father or mother at the helm.
______________________________
Podcast
Asshole Consulting
YouTube Channel
Twitter
Books by Aaron
Amazon Affiliate

22 comments:

Kurt said...

I'm not defending schools, but I have always thought that the real benefit of going to school was socializing. By that I mean, learning how to act around people, make friends, tolerate enemies, etc.

It seems like this aspect would be lost (though I'm sure something could be thought up as a replacement) with formal schooling [daycare] being eliminated.

But I think your overall message is right on. Democrats made women feel worthless at home(when they were anything but) and brainwashed them to "see it their way", on what's wrong with the world.

Anonymous said...

An added bonus of this is books that would get you kicked out of most high schools today you can leave lying around the house. There is some old WW2 books I have with swastikas on them that would cause the schools administration heads to explode.

Anonymous said...

On the next article try to also write about stupid people who breed. Believe it or not some cant even read your (or yr or yours or ...) text.

Thomas Jacob said...

Yet another great article from this fucking asshole aaron clarey

Anonymous said...

Have you looked at how bad the cost of living bias is for certain careers with college required? It's surreal to see college degrees that actually pay off well in a nominal sense, until one realizes that it requires living in New York or DC and living in a rat hole apartment as expensive as a Mcmansion anywhere else. Not to mention the work week hours bias...

This is where the religious right was right, about home schooling and most of everything else when one just keeps looking deeper. Modern cities are demographic sinks and they use colleges to brainwash outsiders into their perverse ideologies and economic niche, so they won't fit in among their own people, so they move to the cities which then replenish themselves like the human capital vampires they are.

http://jacobitemag.com/2017/06/20/modernitys-fertility-problem/

It's actually very disturbing to see a re-emergent "triangle trade" based around schools. The original triangle trade was based on slaves, molasses, and rum, shipped around in a triangle across 3 continents. The new triangle trade is about "good schools", inflated real estate, and good jobs made from the equity poured into the real estate, and these jobs go to college students. The cycle continues until it doesn't.

This will end in the same way as the old triangle trade. Alcoholic Europeans willing to enslave people for cheap rum gradually removed themselves from the gene pool over generations, and then suddenly people realized how disgusting slavery was. Today's triangle trade is sterilizing Europeans who think it's acceptable to speculate in real estate driving the price artificially high, and waste valuable years of female fertility in schools. Even a single one of these things would be devastating, but in combination and set into this reinforced triangle they will annihilate present Western culture.

What triangle trades seem to have in common, unlike legitimate economies, is that they are artificially kept going with CREDIT. And let's just say that truly well educated blacks know who kept the slave trade going...

Anonymous said...

In a crazy state, only innocent pupils can do justice:
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/jun/22/teenage-boys-wear-skirts-to-school-protest-no-shorts-uniform-policy

GwenF said...

Very good article, Captain! I was just wondering what options parents might soon have who don't go along with the alphabet-soup sexual agenda being pushed on their children in public schools, with religious and other private schools also being targeted. I know home schooling is an option, but you've made a case for even eliminating public or private schools altogether, them being unnecessary and extremely uneconomical (for families as well as governments).

Aaron said...

You hit on some of the major reasons why my wife and I homeschool our kids. If she worked, almost all of her wage would go to daycare for the non-school aged kids. If we want them to get a decent education at a private school, our net income would be negative, the outcome still isn't always much better than some public schools, and that's not even factoring the added side costs of eating out more, increased driving, etc.

Another problem we faced is that our oldest son and youngest daughter were born in October and September, respectively. Both are whip smart, but both the public and private schools would require them to wait until they were nearly 6 just to start kindergarten. We adamantly refuse to do that, and I think redshirting is only good for depriving your kids of a valuable year or two from the start of their careers. Homeschooling was the only real solution for us.

Pat Haney said...

Actually, that calculation wasn't far off our own when we had our second kid. I think it was actually less than $4k a year. We sat down and noodled through the maths and realized that my wife was working essentially to pay daycare, and a car payment - so she could go to work and pay for the car and daycare. A hamster wheel of BS, that netted a few hundred extra bucks a month. So she quit. Sold the car. Started her own gig part time at home, and raised our kids.

The end result is three sharp, smart as hell, and well adjusted adults.

The one thing you are missing though, is socialization. I'm sure they have groups in the home schooling business. Most home schooled kids I've met have been kind of pretentious and annoying.

Anonymous said...

This is very similar to why we don't have a cure for cancer. Too many industries and individuals counting on the illness for profit and their own well being. To me it's the ultimate in being self-centered!!

VFM #7916 said...

Ah, Cappy. Some days I think that you'll come over to the Dark Side and be married with 3+ children to save your decline from being the utterly miserable existence the Decline will be.

Or not. That's ok too.

@Pat: Try a curriculum like Classical Conversations. Also lots of park days, friends, and relatives.

Anonymous said...

My company hires many mothers who work virtually from their homes.

One big problem is you can't "work" and be a "mom" at the same time. The only mothers who are able to be consistently productive enough to keep their jobs are those who have family members (usually her parents or jobless husbands) or paid nannies to take care of her kids while she works in a separate room.

So, the mother isn't really saving as much money is she still needs to hire a nanny. She is also still paying taxes. Granted, she is still saving herself the time, stress and expense of commuting, and that's a huge plus.

Regardless, *very few* would be able to work + be a mom + homeschool simultaneously. The time and energy requirements would be extremely high

Remember, we're talking about women here. Women just want a comfortable and carefree life. On top of that, these women are mothers, which means they are already stressed out and tired from not getting enough sleep. We're not talking about young men who are endowed with killer instinct and a drive to build a business or rise through the corporate ranks, and are able to put in 80 hour weeks, week after week.

Another problem is that very few people in general are able to manage themselves well enough to maintain a stay-at-home job. Most quickly become complacent, lazy, and unproductive when there aren't in an environment with supervisors looming about. Many end up going back to normal jobs within a few months.

Duke Norfolk said...

This is the calculation we did starting back in the late 80s (first son born '87, second '92). I had to convince my wife of it but she saw the light. While all the others were running the rat race we cut down the expenses and raised our kids ourselves. What a concept.

We didn't do home schooling, but I sure wish we had. Though God knows it wasn't anywhere near as bad then as now, K-12 has been crap for a very long time. Awful waste of time and my sons hated it.

As for the comment about socialization - that's a load of B.S. So they're going to miss out on all the dysfunctional crap that goes on in schools; oh what a tragedy. For God sakes, school isn't the only place kids can interact with other kids. Use your imagination just a tiny bit.

Pat Haney said...

@VFM - My kids are gone. All scored scholarships of one kind or another. Only one is left in school. The other two have good gigs.

One thing I'd like to see is a different perspective on the "worthless" degree theme.

In my field, I see what I call "Certification Monkeys" - They want a whole alphabet soup of certs. Not all of them useful. Cisco, certainly. Microsoft, somewhat. RCIE? definately.

But that exists in business as well. Take my sister. She graduated with an associates in Nursing (decades ago). It enabled her to pass her boards, get a job, and perform better than most. The program taught the skills a nurse needed, with zero fluff.

Then, being good at her job, they said - "Oh, to be a manager, you need a bachelors". So, she went back (They paid). Then, since she's a good manager, "You need a masters to be an executive". So she went back. The courses she had to take for her masters were mostly stuff she already knew, or was intuitive - like how to run a web meeting.

It's a great paying, open field. Yet, you can't be an RN without endless degrees. My physical therapist had to have a PHD. Why? to help me stretch my neck? that's really all she did. Massage my neck after applying heat. Download the suggested exercises from the web, and have me do it.

Education really has to be right-sized. Really, all you need as an 18yr old is to read, write, speak clearly. Have some sense of history and how government works. The rest? Pah!

Sea Writer said...

My wife and I homeschooled our three because their government school education was crap. The oldest, a genius (literally - IQ 146) was bored, learning nothing because the school was "teaching to test." (They also tried to convince us he was learning disabled, so they could get more federal money. No. He was bored.) The middle one, then in 4th grade, was getting "A"s in English, but could not frick'n read. (It was all look-say.) We decided that was enough, joined the HSLDA, and pulled the two oldest out, and did not send the youngest to Kindergarten.

My wife did most of the teaching. By the time it was all over two were engineers and one is a CAD-CAM tech, finishing up an engineering degree evenings. All are making 3 to 4 times what their contemporary friends and relations are now making.

As for socialization? Home schooled kids learn to deal with people of all ages, rather than just those one or two years older or younger than them. My three get along with everyone, and do not follow fads. They are not Bernie-bots, not on Ritalin, and mature actors - the ones that walk their friends that say, "Hold my beer, and watch this" away from the cliff.

Worked for me.

Anonymous said...

The socialization thing is B.S. Americans socialize poorly, and it's because of public schools. School is an artificial environment where you learn to socialize artificially. The reason every suburban home has a fence built around it is because everyone is embarrassed because of school.

Maybe homeschoolers seem pretentious (which I do seem to agree with) because they are shameless, and outside the public education system, 14 year old's are considered adults.

The irony of school is that it shames you for being smart and knowledgeable. Homeschoolers don't know this. They aren't socialized or programmed to it. If everyone was homeschooled no one would see them as pretentious, because most people would also be shameless.

A lot of the shaming probably happens because most people cheat their way through school. Homeschooled people are unaware about that. They know what they know and they don't need to hide it.

Anonymous said...

When someone brings up lack of socialization as a criticism of home schooling, I know instantly they know nothing about home schooling.

Socialization involves young people learning from those they associate with, values; mores; attitudes; and behavior practices.

So, who do public school kids socialize with? Rooms full of kids, with one adult in front, the enemy. So, what you get are young adults who are socialized as spoiled, narcissistic kids. Just like their spoiled, narcissistic school mates.

I realize there are people who can screw up a wet dream. But, most kids in home schooling do not sit in their house all day long. It simply doesn't take that long to learn twice as much as kids in public school. I know home schooleds who open the instructor's manual, read the next page, and do the work by themselves. No more than an hour or two a day, except possibly for math. They are out and about with their mother, interacting with adults in stores or farmer's markets, or whatever.

The better ones study something, such as a topic universal to all the courses, such as Little House on the Prairie math; science; reading; and more. Then, in the summer they go to the Little House on the Prairie center in Missouri or wherever. Or, maybe Pilgrim math science; reading then go to Massachusetts in the summer

Properly home schooled kids realize they are growing up to be adults. Not penises or vaginas with legs like their public school counterparts.

Anonymous age 75

A Texan said...

Socialization at 'publik skools'? What a joke!

What passes for socialization in a public school gets carried over into the work place environment. I don't go to work and sing kumbuya with everybody, but most workplace are filled with adult highschoolers as far as social skills go.

No wonder workplaces suck and make work already worse than it needs to be.

Anonymous said...

Public school teacher here. My wife homeschools our kids. You have no idea what it's like in there.

SM777 said...

Socialization in "public schools" is dangerous. From what I have seen on Youtube and have heard in the news, "socialization" actually greatly injures, maims, cripples and even kills students these days. The public school system is a danger zone and should be done away with.

Oh, that's right. If that occurred, then the elite would have far fewer brainwashed slaves and one less excuse for the income tax.

Anonymous said...

I have thought this for a while and given the excellent resources available it is more and more real. BUT to those who say it is nuts I refer you to the experience of Canada Post which is hitting the skids. If 30 years ago you told union members that going on strike almost every year would lead to peoPLE questioning their service combined with increasing use of technology, they would have laughed in your face. But today their revenues from first class postage is tanking, their parcel delivery is holding but being challenged and their major revenue stream is unaddressed ad mail, in other words flyers. So you have highly paid union workers, not unlike teachers, doing a job that 14 year olds could do. I get about three real letters a month in my mailbox the rest goes to the blue bin.

One a personal note it was my mother, with her rural high school diploma who taught me how to read, and my engineer father who taught me high school physics

Anonymous said...

@Kurt, in the old days, families were large and included grandparents with relatives often living nearby. We also had churches nearby, too. So, no, schools aren't necessarily needed for 'socialization'.