RESOLVED: An ideal form of No Child Left Behind would be beneficial to the welfare of the USA

Sorry for the late post. Nevertheless, good luck! I negate, Resolved: An ideal form of No Child Left Behind would be beneficial for the United States. *Clarification: From now on, "No Child Left Behind" will be referred to as "NCLB" I'll accept your definitions except ideal. Rather than using the idea of being perfect, I want to use the idea of being the best it can be. CONTENTION ONE: *If NCLB successful, the job market would become unrealistic. ---Let's say for example that everyone's education level was determined on a scale of 1-10 and NCLB worked perfectly by obtaining everyone's education at a realistic 8 or above. The problem that this poses is that if you factor in all jobs, people with a higher education will tend to not get jobs that are below-average when there are jobs that pay more that they are overly-capable of obtaining. What I'm trying to get at, is that if we are to ‘not leave anyone behind', then the jobs that left behind people have been employed under would not see any workers. The job market would be extremely competitive at the top, and the polar opposite on the bottom. This is something that obtains to ‘benefits' for anyone. CONTENTION TWO: NCLB will always fail, ideal or not. ---There are 2 huge barriers for NCLB to cross before it ever obtains benefits: 1) Proactively getting children to WANT to learn, and, 2) The system to check the institutions. ---Now, I urge my opponent to show any sort of ideal system that could legislate children to care about education. Children these days are apathetic toward learning, so no piece of legislation, ideal or not, will be able to overturn this. Then where, I ask, do we get our benefits when before, children who don't care don't learn, and after, children who don't care don't learn? It's a completely neutral net-benefit. Particularly with pathetic Nation wide tests (such as the NAEP test) that all students consider to be one big joke. Furthermore, the checks on the systems who teach these students need a complex system of checks that is truly unobtainable. Yes, we assume the NCLB is ideal in this debate, however, a perfect system will still have its flaws. Let me explain. There is system A, and B. And there is flaw 1, 2 and 3. Now, if you go with system A, you get flaw 2. But if you go with system B, you get flaw 1. You might say, go with what works with both of them, but then you get flaw 3. -APPLICATION: If you try to fix the obvious flaws in NCLB, you will find an impossible mid-ground. You might try and fix the system by making it so that firing of teachers is not so high. This would get the benefit of teachers being under less pressure, but at the same time would make it so that teachers didn't care if they met the appropriate standards. This argument leads to the conclusion of, CONTENTION THREE: There is no one ideal system. ---I assume that if this system was found, it would be equal. But that is the true problem with NCLB, is that it fails to adjust to each school. EG: My school has gotten a lot of immigrants that just don't care now we have a bunch of bad grades and a bunch of drop outs. There should be an exception for us, but not even an ideal form of NCLB would create this exception. Why? Because ‘we are still leaving students behind' and ‘we are simply getting more kids in our system like everyone else'. Furthermore, you can compare this to the ghetto, or even the polar opposite. All of these institutions require different standards, yet, NCLB tries to standardize all of them identically. This does not obtain any objective benefits since each of them receive subjective costs. CONTENTION FOUR: NCLB costs money. -From: http://www.newamerica.net... ---"School districts, states, and stakeholders have sued the federal government for enforcing an "underfunded mandate" that requires them to meet proficiency and attendance levels without providing what they believe are necessary funds to do so. For several years the fight has gone on with seemingly no hope for conclusion… among the four states, per pupil spending would have to increase between .4 percent and 38 percent ($12,797 and $8,635, respectively) to reach 70 percent proficiency and 16 percent and 58 percent ($7,078 and $10,283, respectively) to reach 90 percent proficiency. States with relatively high achievement required the smallest spending increases, while those with low achievement required larger increases. This analysis suggests states are not spending nearly enough to bring 100 percent of students to proficiency." -Now certainly you could say that an ideal form of NCLB would create more funding, but how much benefit are you getting out of this new education when it isn't allowing people to get better jobs (high market), AND it really isn't allowing people to get more education per dollar (apathetic students). It is simply not net-beneficial, and is a waste of our time. Let the student decide, don't let the government overstretch it's arms to say what we must and mustn't do. My opponent's case: ---He has yet to show how the system would help education. Yes, you have an ‘ideal form' of NCLB, but you don't have ideal education. If I made the perfect game, there would still be people who suck at playing it. I urge my opponent to show how this ‘perfect system' would be able to force students to learn, or would outweigh the economic costs displayed in C4. ---You can't have better jobs for everyone. At some point you have to cut back (which is not advantageous for the people who didn't get the job they are capable of doing) or you will see terrible economic results (like no one being able to go to the grocery store because no one works there). ---Theoretically? Yes. Realistically? No. If everyone got 1 trillion dollars a year, then inflation would rise significantly to make it so that the money canceled each other out. Basic economic idea is that printing more money gets more money but makes it less legitimate and makes the economy a net-cost. -None of my opponents points stand! I furthermore reserve the right to add and change my arguments in round 2! Thanks and good luck!