Rahm Emanuel wants to require acceptance letters for high school graduation

[Mopsus]

This is up there with school uniforms as bad ideas.

What's wrong with school uniforms?

They can be an undue burden on poor students and family's, and they get rid of the individuality that all students should have and need.

There's nothing individualistic about what adolescents wear.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Do politicians like Rahm Emanuel actually want most people to be kept institutionalized from cradle to grave?

Possibly he just read the first chapter of Seeing Like A State and got entirely the wrong idea...

In fairness, I read the first chapter of Seeing Like A State and and thought that what Scott was describing wasn't nearly as terrible as he made it out to be, and that the good probably outweighed the bad all things considered.

(Also, I just realized that the name of the professor I'm TAing for right now is the reverse of the author's. LOL)

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

This is up there with school uniforms as bad ideas.

What's wrong with school uniforms?

They can be an undue burden on poor students and family's, and they get rid of the individuality that all students should have and need.

There's nothing individualistic about what adolescents wear.

The adolescents think there is, and self-perception is important at that age. (N.B. I've never felt and still don't feel obliged to form a strong opinion on school uniforms as such.)

[Rjjr77]

This is up there with school uniforms as bad ideas.

What's wrong with school uniforms?

They can be an undue burden on poor students and family's, and they get rid of the individuality that all students should have and need.

There's nothing individualistic about what adolescents wear.

The adolescents think there is, and self-perception is important at that age. (N.B. I've never felt and still don't feel obliged to strong opinion on school uniforms as such.)

I'd make the argument that uniforms place less burden on the poor. Eliminates designer labels, allows for Two or three school uniforms to be used by a student, and often times they are cheaper and have assistance programs

[Dr. Arch]

This is up there with school uniforms as bad ideas.

What's wrong with school uniforms?

They can be an undue burden on poor students and family's, and they get rid of the individuality that all students should have and need.

There's nothing individualistic about what adolescents wear.

The adolescents think there is, and self-perception is important at that age. (N.B. I've never felt and still don't feel obliged to strong opinion on school uniforms as such.)

I'd make the argument that uniforms place less burden on the poor. Eliminates designer labels, allows for Two or three school uniforms to be used by a student, and often times they are cheaper and have assistance programs

Not to mention they erase overt class differences.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

This is up there with school uniforms as bad ideas.

What's wrong with school uniforms?

They can be an undue burden on poor students and family's, and they get rid of the individuality that all students should have and need.

There's nothing individualistic about what adolescents wear.

The adolescents think there is, and self-perception is important at that age. (N.B. I've never felt and still don't feel obliged to strong opinion on school uniforms as such.)

I'd make the argument that uniforms place less burden on the poor. Eliminates designer labels, allows for Two or three school uniforms to be used by a student, and often times they are cheaper and have assistance programs

Not to mention they erase overt class differences.

coming from a country with ubiquitous school uniforms and also a far more rigid class system than America, I would dispute that.

The one thing I will say about uniforms (as they exist in Britain) often have some sort of cargo cult thing going on behind them, where higher-ups get it into their head that merely reproducing the trappings of public schooling (NB: the British term for elite private schools, confusingly) like House systems fancier uniforms and AUTHORITARIANISM they will get Eton. Which leads to absurdities nowadays:

https://www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/2017/jan/21/secret-teacher-my-school-is-putting-style-over-substance

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/dec/30/no-excuses-inside-britains-strictest-school

That said, I don't think I was particularly inconvenienced by my uniform. I lost my blazer and tie like fifty times, but there was a constant recycling through the lost property system so I never had to pay for it again. Which of course leads us to the point that uniforms don't really make kids better dressed or even avoid standing out from the ground. Show-offs still tease with the boundaries of the uniform regulations, the poorer kids still stood out by having ill-fitting uniforms (or generic blazers with the school badge stitched on)  etc. (even worse when enterprising headteachers try and put dress shirt, ties and blazers in primary schools - nothing more ridiculous than a five year old in a tie IMO). And of course, there is the problem of certain teachers having a bit too much interest in the length of girls' skirts.

[emailking]

There's nothing individualistic about what adolescents wear.

Disagree. But even if we accept your premise, at least they're choosing to wear the same stuff as everyone else, rather than having the school force it upon them.

I'd make the argument that uniforms place less burden on the poor. Eliminates designer labels, allows for Two or three school uniforms to be used by a student, and often times they are cheaper and have assistance programs

But unless they wear the uniforms as normal clothes outside of school, or get them completely for free, then they're still spending more on clothes than they otherwise would have.

[Rjjr77]

There's nothing individualistic about what adolescents wear.

Disagree. But even if we accept your premise, at least they're choosing to wear the same stuff as everyone else, rather than having the school force it upon them.

I'd make the argument that uniforms place less burden on the poor. Eliminates designer labels, allows for Two or three school uniforms to be used by a student, and often times they are cheaper and have assistance programs

But unless they wear the uniforms as normal clothes outside of school, or get them completely for free, then they're still spending more on clothes than they otherwise would have.

Not really, quite a few families make a major expense of buying nicer school clothes for their children, this includes all levels of income. Being able to buy a couple uniforms for school would be cheaper than buying several school outfits. Something parents sacrifice to do all the time.

[emailking]

Hmm, ok. I had uniforms and so never had the experience.

[Mopsus]

There's nothing individualistic about what adolescents wear.

Disagree. But even if we accept your premise, at least they're choosing to wear the same stuff as everyone else, rather than having the school force it upon them.

Exactly: We must teach our children that conforming to legitimate authority is much more important than conforming to peer pressure.

[RINO Tom]

Rahm Emanuel is a moron who loves to hear himself on the news, nothing to see here.

[emailking]

There's nothing individualistic about what adolescents wear.

Disagree. But even if we accept your premise, at least they're choosing to wear the same stuff as everyone else, rather than having the school force it upon them.

Exactly: We must teach our children that conforming to legitimate authority is much more important than conforming to peer pressure.

I would think that should be a parental issue if anything. But my point is that people, even children, should have the freedom to conform or not conform to peer pressure when it involves something as harmless as clothing, at least insofar as the government goes.

But I also disagree anyway with your premise that kids are not expressing their individuality in what they choose to wear.

[Mopsus]

I would think that should be a parental issue if anything. But my point is that people, even children, should have the freedom to conform or not conform to peer pressure when it involves something as harmless as clothing, at least insofar as the government goes.

Deciding whether to accept or reject peer pressure is far from an unforced, abstract choice. That's why the state must intervene on the side of reason.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Kids may be. Not teenagers though.

[emailking]

Deciding whether to accept or reject peer pressure is far from an unforced, abstract choice. That's why the state must intervene on the side of reason.

I don't think it's abstract. I just don't see why the state should be involved in something so trivial. It's just clothing. We're not talking about peer pressure to do drugs or perform dangerous stunts or something. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Kids may be. Not teenagers though.

No I disagree with that as well actually. If anything, I think teenagers express themselves through their clothing more than kids do, since they typically select their own clothes, and often buy them themselves.

[Mopsus]

I don't think it's abstract. I just don't see why the state should be involved in something so trivial. It's just clothing. We're not talking about peer pressure to do drugs or perform dangerous stunts or something.

Schools have a responsibility to do more than educate: they have a responsibility to built up. Kids must be taught how to present themselves.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What I mean is that teenagers don't express themselves through what they wear - they express the group that they identify with.

[Simfan34]

It's hard to understand where he's coming from. A student without a college offer or enlisting in the military will be forbidden from receiving their high school diploma, therefore making them virtually unemployable? Even if they've met all other criteria for graduation? Does he want to create-- or at least enlarge-- a indefinitely marginalized underclass?

I can't even imagine a wonk as detached from reality as is humanly possible coming up with such a illogical idea. The immediate impact would be a dramatic reduction in already-abysmal graduation rates, or an explosion in students enrolling in community colleges only to immediately drop out. Even if you wanted to force, rather than encourage, people into higher education, the way to do that would be to make it mandatory, not prevent people from graduating from high school.

This doesn't particularly come across as a "right-wing" or "left-wing" idea-- it's just a baffling one.

[emailking]

I don't think it's abstract. I just don't see why the state should be involved in something so trivial. It's just clothing. We're not talking about peer pressure to do drugs or perform dangerous stunts or something.

Schools have a responsibility to do more than educate: they have a responsibility to built up. Kids must be taught how to present themselves.

I'm not saying there can't be a dress code, but I thought we were talking about uniforms. Nobody presents themselves (or very few do anyway) through uniforms unless actually required to.

What I mean is that teenagers don't express themselves through what they wear - they express the group that they identify with.

But that, in and of itself, is an expression of themselves. And even within that dynamic, there is individual variation, far more than you get with uniforms.

[Mopsus]

I'm not saying there can't be a dress code, but I thought we were talking about uniforms. Nobody presents themselves (or very few do anyway) through uniforms unless actually required to.

There should be some variation in student uniforms, as different people have different color palettes, body types, etc. Students should be taught these things, because they're unlikely to learn them anywhere else.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's in the best interest of schools to suppress subcultures, so that they don't distract from the learning environment. What kids want to do in their free time should be reserved for their free time.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Best argument I can see for this is working on the assumption that schools will want to keep their graduation rate up and so they will be proactive in helping get students get connected to post-graduation opportunities. But even if so, the list of options for what comes next is severely limited in this proposal.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Clearly we should punish those people (very disproportionately poor, and considerably less white than the general public) who won't/can't go to college by condemning them to almost certain lifelong poverty and struggle.

The fact that Obama chose this piece of sh*t as his first chief of staff says a lot about both his ideological priorities and moral character - none of it good. Yet Democrats continue to love him and his Presidency! *sigh*

[All Along The Watchtower]

Also, to those who think Emanuel was the exception among Obama advisers, rather than the rule:







And of course, the icing on the cake:
The Obama Foundation Launches With Lobbyists and Wall Street at the Wheel