Formal education (K-12) ought to be compulsory in the United States

I thank Con for his response. :) PRO 1A 1. Living wage is the wage it takes to survive. If a student without a diploma can't earn a living wage, then you vote Pro because I give more people diplomas. Clear link. 2. Con ignores all data I provide in my 1A that gives me a big margin of maximizing employment. The US is calibrated to individual rights. The majority can't succeed without the success of the minority. 3. On pro's source: this article lists 25 jobs that don't require a bachelor's, but there are 2 problems with it. 1: It says nothing of a *diploma*. 2: These jobs can't absorb millions of people, or they already would be. Extend my data on average pay from RD 1. 1B 1. Go back to Con discrimination. If we use his own analogy, these students don't choose not to eat—they are denied food. Homeschooling is a perfectly viable way to exercise one's right to not attend compulsory public education while still protecting children who have no stable home or resources available to them. Con's world represents a net loss in rights for people who need the most protection. 2. Con has yet to show us *how* non-compulsory education will maintain equal opportunities. He's said it, but he hasn't warranted it. 3. Con misunderstood my reference to US laws. That was merely an example of the state being able to mandate behavior for the good of all citizens collectively. CE is the same story. 1C 1. How is it that equal educational opportunities will be provided to underserved students outside of CE? If education is voluntary, then it's voluntary. All motivation to provide equal access is eliminated the moment we do something like privatize schools, which is essentially what a voluntary model looks like. 2. Actually, it is the state's job to provide its citizens with basic necessities. The tax dollars that I am referring to are directed towards these students only because CE exists. The whole "hot meal" thing is being blown out of proportion by Con, but legislation in all 50 states is what has made it the school system's responsibility. The will of the citizens of this nation is to make the education system a *support* system. 2A 1. This made me laugh. Not only are abstract math concepts integral to the development of problem solving & critical thinking skills, but Con *actually* said that persuasive writing is a useless skill! What is Con doing RIGHT NOW? I do believe he is on a website designed for the sole purpose of writing persuasively. 2. You've given us a claim that education is worthless with no warrants, & then tried to distract us by saying that you don't have to prove yourself universally true. I have yet to see a warrant, though. 3. Extend the standards I quoted. The meat of my argument lies in those warrants. The standards cover *essential* skills, which directly counters the Con advocacy. 2B 1. Con has yet to address the fact that not every child has a parent that is willing or able to fulfill their parental obligations. Since social and life skills are directly tied to successful citizenship & stable individual welfare, the state's obligation is evident. 2. No system is perfect. Con seems to think that I have to eliminate ALL people who don't graduate from high school in order to win this debate. That's not the case. I just have to prove that the benefits outweigh the harms. 3. Con still has yet to warrant how he'll be accessing all of the benefits of a Pro world without using CE. He'll need to do that sometime soon. CON C1 1. I quoted you. You admit you can't prove that education is actually useless. I've given you a block of evidence to the contrary, but apparently we should just believe you anyway. 2. The hot meal thing is provable. First of all, it's the reason that the federal government created the free/reduced lunch program [1]. Not only that, but the world community has already come to the conclusion that schools have an obligation to provide food to their students: "WFP School Feeding Programmes encourage children to attend school by providing a free nutritious meal…In many cases, this may be the only meal children eat during the day. This simple meal helps children concentrate on their studies & ensures they attend class [2]." The US is part of this community, & participates in & funds WFP. [1] http://www.fns.usda.gov... [2] http://www2.hawaii.edu... 3. Taking out hot meals doesn't really affect my offense. Education being useless, on the other hand, is key to voting Con. If I prove this claim untrue (which I have), then you can vote Pro on that alone. 4. Moving target, Con. You say in RD 1: "Compulsory education doesn't serve a meaningful purpose…The only skill education has successfully imparted is obedience & the will to accept authority." That entire C1 is talking about how *all* CE education is useless. Now, you concede that some education is useful. Which is it? 5. Con does have the obligation to prove CE a flawed system. Again, in RD 1, he says, "CE makes kids accept being a tool of the working machine…CE fails to educate…CE has dissipated intelligence…CE is purposeless." He's trying to get you to eliminate a system based on flaws he either can't prove exist, or that have proved fixable. He *must* prove that CE harms outweigh the benefits. C2 1. When do I say schools, teachers, & students are equal? In fact, I've maintained throughout that they aren't, which is why we need CE & the standards movement. I'm working to fix inequality. He's entrenching it. 2. So we both accept that my link is a legit piece of evidence illustrating the essential skills being taught in K-12 education. 3. This basically stated that education is being improved by the standards movement. If education continues to improve as it is now (which researchers predict it will), then the statistical gap between homeschooling & public schooling will disappear. 4. I don't understand how this translated argument gets you any offense. C3 1. "If we make education voluntary, then maybe the need for a diploma will just go away." 1: Says who? 2: How many people have to starve & rape the economy before that happens? My crystal ball is currently out of service, so I guess he'll need to consult his. Extend specialization again. The need for more advanced degrees is currently RISING, not falling, & it has more to do with global competition, which Con cannot solve for, than internal employer preference. 2. You didn't cover institutional discrimination at all. You can't. Your advocacy cannot solve for it. Mine does. Also, it doesn't matter who you were addressing; the casualties of adopting your advocacy don't change. Con talks about people who will logically seek out food if they are hungry as if there is always just food laying around for the hungry to eat. Education is the same way. Without available resources, it ain't gonna happen.