One Personal Finance Credit Should Be Required In High School

First of all, allow me to thank you for taking up my challenge in a thoughtful, intelligent, and eminently debatable way. It is always gratifying to have a good opponent. Now, to the issue at hand. I shall respond to your arguments in the order in which you presented them, with the exception of your major point (no proven effectiveness of a personal finance class), which I shall address last. 1)"You cannot prove that people would take this class seriously, learn from it, or even use its teachings to help themselves." I agree completely. Without extensive research, it is impossible to PROVE most if not all claims satisfactorily. I will, however, present some logical arguments. Firstly, the classes you listed that students supposedly forget and do not apply to their real lives (namely Calculus and Spanish) are neither as pervasive nor as basic as finance. Most of us will likely go our entire lives without having to find a derivative or apply the Pythagorean Identity outside of school. Similarly, living in a society that accepts English as a primary language in most instances, Spanish is not a necessity. Everyone will have to pay bills. So who is to say that they will not retain the teachings of a necessary class as they do not retain those of a class that relys on principles not necessarily applicable to everyday life? I am sure that mathematicians still understand Calculus, because they must. And we all must understand personal finance. 2) This is listed under your first point, but I shall address it separately. You said, "we already have mandatory classes (health) and programs like D.A.R.E. that do little to nothing to prevent people from acting a certain way or engaging in risky behavior." If you require proof for my previous points, then I shall do the same. Is this opinion or fact? Who is to say that Health and D.A.R.E. do not prevent risky behavior? If we removed them, isn't it completely possible that the said problems would worsen? There is simply no evidence that they don't work. 3)Next, you stated "don't make [the class] MANDATORY. Doing so might interrupt current school systems or high school curriculums." You went on to say that there are already mandatory classes that teach similar concepts. To begin, I should say that I do go to a private Catholic school, and thus may have a different view of a modern American education, but I also have solid friendships with people who go to a variety of public schools in the area. And I have never heard of a Macro Economics requirement. What I have heard of is a requirement for a certain number of practical classes, such as Welding, Home Ec, or Computer Applications. In many schools, including my own, Personal Finance is offered as an elective to fill that requirement. Therefore, the change in the system would be slight: say two credits of practical classes were required. Further require one of those to be a personal finance class, the other an elective of choice. That does not disrupt the curriculum, but rather solidifies it. 4)"We are all different and come from different financial backgrounds... how can a class incorporate aqequate diversity (while still functioning correctly) to attend to each students unique situation where different strategies may be necessary?" In the resolution, it was never stated that I was mandating one curriculum; rather, I am mandating one class, the content of which (within the obvious limits) to be decided by the teachers and administration at each school. Furthermore, isn't this how school normally functions? We all have different intelligence levels and learning styles, but there have been schools that have successfully adapted without fracturing into a multitude of individualized classes. Broad concepts (such as how to balance a checkbook), are applicable no matter a person's tax bracket. 5)"And on a final note, our country has been in economic crisis in the past, and somehow we have always found a way to overcome it WITHOUT mandating this type of class." I will address this in conjunction with your first point, that "you cannot prove that requiring a Personal Finance class in high school would change [the economic crisis]." Certainly, there have been recessions in the past, and we have overcome. Without a Personal Finance Class. But this does not mean that the government did not pass mandates to help us overcome. For my evidence, I cite The Great Depression. Often, President Herbert Hoover is criticized because of his lack of action during the beginning (and, to a degree, middle) of The Great Depression. His personal philosophy of rugged individualism impeded a move toward government involvement. Those laws that he did pass were weak and ineffectual. Then came Franklin Delano Roosevelt. What is remembered about his inaugural speech is his famous quote "we have nothing to fear but fear itself." What people don't remember is that FDR threatened to take dictatorial power if Congress did not comply with his wishes. This lead to unprecendented Congressional cooperation during the first 100 days of his tenure, during which time 15 bills were passed. These bills included the NIRA (National Industrial Recovery Act), which authorized the government to do everything from stimulate the economy to create codes of business. This was a mandate with a vengeance, designed to stop irresponsible business practices. And the result? Both the GDP and employment rose. So, mandates have been effectual in the past. Perhaps they were not "this type of class", but history makes it clear that mandates are required. Furthermore, you may well argue that a strictly defined law is different than a nebulous class, and you would be right. But take then a more similar situation: FDR's Fireside Chats. The President took the time to sit down and talk to (i.e. teach) the American people about the problems in the economy. He implored them not to withdraw their money from banks. And bank deposits rose. FDR took a counterintuitive measure (after all, it was the closure of banks and subsequent loss of the populace's deposits that caused the Depression to spiral out of control in the first place), with mostly long-term results and little immediate appeal, and applied it. People listened, they complied, and the results were enormously beneficial. Teaching, even when not mandatory, has worked in the past. When the problem and the solution are clearly explained, the results are tangible. Finally, I would like to close by saying that with the current economic situation, any chance of relief should be explored. As I stated before, foreclosures are a driving force behind the current recession. I also, however, mentioned consumer spending power, or retail sales. That is 70% of our economy, and thus a major concern. If Americans continue to be irresponsible with their money, and can no longer buy the goods that provide the foundation for nearly our entire economy, than the results will be disastrous. And retail sales have suddenly, and unexpectedly, declined. Foreclosures may have started it, but I for one will be watching Walmart's profits. I have shown that a class (in effect if not in name) has worked before, and it is imperative that we implement any measures that might work now. Already, the dollar is declining. Deficits are growing. And the Federal Reserve Board has twice cut interest rates in recent weeks. That is a measure to prevent a depression. And it (so far) hasn't had tangible results. We need this class, and anything else that will do an ounce of good.