I Hate Meaningless Music

Why on earth do us tax payers have to pay for schools to teach arts and music? Like it’s absolutely useless to a child and they won’t ever make money from it, so why not just scrap that stuff and put the money towards better maths and science teaching? Kids don’t need to learn about music or art, they find their own.

Sports is a bit of a waste of money as well. Why waste it on false promises of fame or income, only to find there is none?

No, education should be about working with businesses, companies, getting children to get used to actual skills that people care about and will actually be useful for society and makes money. There is no time or place for things that does not make money or is not interesting to companies, businesses or society.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

TinyViolins · 31-35, M

Because the theory is that it will save money in later costs. If children are given after-school activities and creative outlets, they have something positive in their lives to keep them away from harmful things like crime, drugs, and gangs. That would save taxpayer money on police officers, court systems, jails, hospital visits, and property damage.

Kids have a lot of time and energy, so the rationale is to use that towards something positive and enjoyable for them instead of leaving them to become influenced by toxic environments

NestChicken · 31-35, M

@TinyViolins nope, more police, more prisons, tougher sentences. Punish them More. No need for arts.

If they are wrong or emotionally corrupt, lock them up, let them rot.

TinyViolins · 31-35, M

@NestChicken You realize that would cost taxpayers more money, right? That would defeat the biggest basis for your argument against these programs