[quote=“Jaboney”]Until those jobs are gone and these guys are 40 years old and without marketable skills or the ability to acquire such skills. Then it’s the east coast fishery all over again.
If not a national crisis, it’s certainly a regional or provincial one.[/quote]
And their social programming isn’t complete until they graduate from University, right?
[quote=“Chewycorns”]The Catholic School System in Alberta is especially strong. I wonder if the StatsCan Study separated the two (Public and Catholic). I’d be willing to bet that the dropout rate for the Catholic System is significantly lower. Better teachers and a much richer school board.[/quote]One hopes. The local religious school system where I grew up was similarly endowed, but showed significantly poorer results and expelled far more students.
Just out of curiosity, could you reconcile these two statements for me? I don’t want to get you wrong.
[quote="[url=The ridiculous legacy of the Bush (II) administration - #73 by Chewycorns I don’t think some provinces would appreciate what is basically another type of National Energy Program mandated from Ottawa, particularly in these uncertain economic times. Such a program could hurt the economies of Alberta and Newfoundland (oil), and Saskatchewan (coal etc.).[/quote]
[quote=“Surly”][quote=“Jaboney”]Until those jobs are gone and these guys are 40 years old and without marketable skills or the ability to acquire such skills. Then it’s the east coast fishery all over again.
If not a national crisis, it’s certainly a regional or provincial one.[/quote]
And their social programming isn’t complete until they graduate from University, right?[/quote]
And thank you for that sunshiny incursion, Surly. Not only not giving me the benefit of the doubt… but assuming the direct opposite of my intended meaning.
Review, if you please, my opening statement:
All very consistent with my view that a gov’t of the people exists to serve those same people. Not to program, but to empower them.
So thank you very much… kiss my ass. 
Oh, you meant at the community level. I thought you meant it was some kind of national crisis. Yes, communities adapt and change according to environmental pressures, supply and demand and all that. Nothing new here. Some communities thrive, some just survive, some go extinct. That’s life. I don’t see that as any kind of social disaster.
I’ve lived in Western Australia, Tasmania, and Victoria. I’ve seen a lot of this community boom/bust stuff, especially in Tasmania (where the mining and logging industries go through cycles). When I graduated from high school (year 10 in Tasmania), I was one student out of a year level of several hundred in my school, and out of that several hundred who graduated from year 10 I can only be certain that about 25% even went on to years 11 and 12. Out of those from my high school who went on to years 11 and 12, only about half a dozen finally ended up at university (myself included). So about 75% of the kids never made it to years 11 and 12, and less than 5% made it to university.
I didn’t see that as a disaster, and nor did anyone else. Most of those kids were going to be swept up by the primary industries for which they were mentally and physically best suited (farming, logging, etc), or if they were better than average then a good blue collar job (typically plumbing, timber working, or whatever). Such a future was ideal for them. They would trundle off to TAFE, get themselves a trade diploma after a couple of years, walk into an apprenticeship, and settle down contently in lower class obscurity keeping the wheels turning for everyone else.
I can’t think of a better future for most of the kids with which I went to school. A lot of them complained bitterly that they were even in year 9, let alone year 11 or 12, given that they expected to go to straight to work on the family farm for the rest of their lives, or else chase an apprenticeship with the local sparky. Higher education is wasted on such people. They don’t want it, they don’t need it, and it’s useless trying to hammer it into them by force.
Tomorrow? Surely not. You suggested earlier that they won’t lose their jobs for years yet, not until they’re over 30. I doubt they’ll be wandering the streets being antisocial at that stage of their lives.
I have yet to be convinced that the choice they are making is ‘very poor’, and that ‘the virtues of the best choice aren’t being communicated well’. People who make such a choice are probably best suited to it. It would be waste to try and convince them that they should be doing something else regardless of their personal wishes. In any case, 3 out of 10 is a very low ratio.
[quote=“Jaboney”]
Just out of curiosity, could you reconcile these two statements for me? I don’t want to get you wrong. [/quote]
[quote="[url=The ridiculous legacy of the Bush (II) administration - #73 by Chewycorns I don’t think some provinces would appreciate what is basically another type of National Energy Program mandated from Ottawa, particularly in these uncertain economic times. Such a program could hurt the economies of Alberta and Newfoundland (oil), and Saskatchewan (coal etc.).[/quote]
Sure. I don’t think anyone can deny that the economy of Alberta has been red hot. In terms of GDP per capita, Alberta is far above the other provinces (with the exception of the NWT).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ca … ic_product
However, anyone who has lived in Alberta during the early 80s remembers the bust that resulted from low oil prices and Trudeau’s statist and redistributive NEP. With housing starts down and employment growth slowing (a measure of uncertainty wouldn’t you say?), I think it would be safe to say the economy is slowing although things are still generally moving forward (3 percent growth vs. 6 percent last year). Would imposing a federal tax at such a time make good economic sense in your opinion? I certainly don’t think it would and don’t think Harper would risk implementing one.
[quote=“Fortigurn”]Some communities thrive, some just survive, some go extinct. That’s life. I don’t see that as any kind of social disaster.[/quote] Sorry, I don’t get that.
The kids you describe dropping out, going to work in primary industries and whatnot… that may indeed be an ideal future for them. Great, the more power to them. Why not offer trade and apprenticeship programs in high school to ensure that a) they’re correct in making that choice (god knows, enough people complete training only to discover that they’re temperamentally unsuited to job X), b) they’re ready to start moving up the ladder once they have some experience under their belts, and c) they’re prepared to jump into something else should things go sideways?
This isn’t directly analogous but close enough: my undergrad college had its roots in training locals for the trades and kept economic realities ever in sight. Thus, fine arts students with an interest in sculpture were required to get a ticket for industrial welding in order to graduate. Most wanted to learn to weld well enough for their art: the school wanted them to learn to weld well enough to feed themselves just in case the BFA they chose to pursue wasn’t enough to bring home the bacon. Choice is one thing; informed choice is another. Certainly, everyone should be free to fail; I don’t see why poor programs should increase the probability of failure. I happened to be a student rep on the college’s board of governors in my final year, which also happened to be when a major program review was undertaken – and students who had graduated from the Fine Arts program five years earlier were adamant that the industrial requirements for graduation be retained.
And this has nothing to do with higher education. It’s basic high school literacy, numeracy, and employable skills.
Out of curiosity, if you see a 30% drop out rate as low, what would be unacceptably high?
Chewcorns, thanks. In 2006, Alberta’s budget surplus was $8.7-billion. If done right, I think there’s plenty of room there to work towards promoting the skills and industries that’ll keep the good times rolling when the tar sands are no longer profitable (or ecologically sustainable). Far better to do that locally, but as the provincial gov’t won’t (no matter how loud and long the ranchers and farmers kick and scream about water diversion and pollution) acting federally would seem to be the next best alternative.
A lot of the posters seem to think that working in the oil fields and tar sands is low-paying work, or menial, or the best one can hope for in bad economic times, or only fit for illiterate Mexican illegal immigrants. Actually, these jobs pay very well. Fort McMurray is a northern town in Alberta, where I sure wouldn’t want to live, but it’s a boom town. The kids are dropping out of school because they can make a lot of money. Maybe some of them will go back to school when the boom is over; right now they seem to think making hay while the sun shines is the best idea.
My brother-in-law used to be a teacher in an oil town in Saskatchewan (also booming right now), and the teachers there had a terrible time with the students. Why? Because most of them had a terrible attitude towards education - they knew they didn’t need an education to get a good job, and the proof was often right at home, where high-school-drop-out dad might be making $200,000 or more a year (US and Canadian dollars are about at par right now) in the oil field.
There are waitresses - waitresses, not hookers or strippers - who are making $300,000 a year in Calgary. If the economy turns, these kinds of incomes aren’t going to be available, so maybe young people aren’t wrong to think they should start working and raking in the cash right away, while they still can.
[quote=“bababa”]A lot of the posters seem to think that working in the oil fields and tar sands is low-paying work, or menial, or the best one can hope for in bad economic times, or only fit for illiterate Mexican illegal immigrants. Actually, these jobs pay very well. Fort McMurray is a northern town in Alberta, where I sure wouldn’t want to live, but it’s a boom town. The kids are dropping out of school because they can make a lot of money. Maybe some of them will go back to school when the boom is over; right now they seem to think making hay while the sun shines is the best idea.
My brother-in-law used to be a teacher in an oil town in Saskatchewan (also booming right now), and the teachers there had a terrible time with the students. Why? Because most of them had a terrible attitude towards education - they knew they didn’t need an education to get a good job, and the proof was often right at home, where high-school-drop-out dad might be making $200,000 or more a year (US and Canadian dollars are about at par right now) in the oil field.
There are waitresses - waitresses, not hookers or strippers - who are making $300,000 a year in Calgary. If the economy turns, these kinds of incomes aren’t going to be available, so maybe young people aren’t wrong to think they should start working and raking in the cash right away, while they still can.[/quote]
now you’ve gone and made jabone weep. But at least he can quote Shakespeare.
[quote]
All very consistent with my view that a gov’t of the people exists to serve those same people. Not to program, but to empower them. [/quote]
Sure, empower them to do, think and accept what the government wants. Canada is great I’m sure, except for all the things about it that are stupid or suck.
Slings and arrows, sticks and stones, and you know better.
Look, I’m glad I can quote Shakespeare, but I didn’t learn to do that in school anyway, and I can’t help thinking I might have been better off to get a job quickly, when I was 17 or 18 or so. You can always go back to school later.
These kids NEED their liberal arts degrees! 
Methinks the lady doth …oops, that doesn’t fit. And yet…
I’ll agree here with babababab. These kids are damn smart IMO. These days more and more parents are smarter than their kids’ teachers anyway. You get a chance to pull in big money before you’re 20 or stay in school and work part time at Dairy Queen.
These guys, should they stay and work will own houses long before their classmates with BAs in Teaching English in Taiwan degrees. They’ll be able to go to night school and probbaly open their own businesses.
I’m not clear as to what your concern/complaint is jabone? That unedjumucated people will make money and raise kids?
[quote=“bababa”]I can’t help thinking I might have been better off to get a job quickly, when I was 17 or 18 or so. You can always go back to school later.[/quote]Now, I can think of a very long list of things I would have been better off doing, but I certainly didn’t have the foresight to map out the best route to my goals at the time, nor the ability to really hear the advice that wiser counselors had to offer.
I came very, very close to scoring a full-time position at a lumber mill one summer after dropping out of college. Had I done so, it’s possible (but probably unlikely) that I would have gone back to school. Probably depends on how wisely I manged the money I would have been making, how invested I was in the lifestyle bought by what would have seemed like high(ish) income, and whether or not I acquired dependents.
But again, that’s higher education, not high school, and ignores the fact that I’m criticizing the educational system for failing to make completing high school clearly the best option, not the youth for pursuing what appears to be in their best interests. As old fred so enjoyed pointing out, the two leading indicators of poverty are being in a single-parent household, and not finishing high school.
[quote=“Shurly”]I’m not clear as to what your concern/complaint is jabone? That unedjumucated people will make money and raise kids?[/quote]No. The concern is that they will (make money), will (raise kids), and won’t (be able to continue making money and providing for those kids). Again, leading indicators of poverty… (again, channeling fred.)
And as most lotto winners and pro athletes end up back where they were ten years later, it’s not a bad bet that young, unskilled guys pulling down 200K/yr are likely to find themselves in the same boat.
[quote]No. The concern is that they will (make money), will (raise kids), and won’t (be able to continue making money and providing for those kids). Again, leading indicators of poverty… (again, channeling fred.)
And as most lotto winners and pro athletes end up back where they were ten years later, it’s not a bad bet that young, unskilled guys pulling down 200K/yr are likely to find themselves in the same boat.[/quote]
That’s a valid concern. I don’t share it though.
They may slog through the oil and make 200k now, but in ten years, they’ll only be making 75k. Bummer. If they are moderately smart they’ll be semi-retired by the time they’re 40.
Not every dropout is a drag on the country. Especially those with lots of disposable income.
I just wish I’d learned a trade instead of being railroaded into a worthless university course. But in my day, only the smartest kids got the chance to go to uni. Nowadays it seems they all bloody go and end up with a silly bit of paper, the value of which has been diminished to the point of being worthless.
Agreed. There’s much to be said about a man or woman who can fix an engine, or build a deck for their house.
Too many people can’t do much of anything save provide a service that countless others can provide equally well.
If these boys are getting into the oil industry, that is definitely a skill they can take with them to another oil field or rig.
[quote=“Surly”]If these boys are getting into the oil industry, that is definitely a skill they can take with them to another oil field or rig.[/quote]Which is why so many Newfies with Hibernia experience are flying cross-country every three weeks: three weeks on the job in Alberta, three weeks off back home.
My question is, where else could they take those skills besides another oil field? Specialist mechanics and guys in accessory industries will probably go pretty well for themselves no matter what happens to the oil and gas industry because those skills translate easily enough.
And the others?
If they’ve left high school prematurely, without a sufficient literacy and numeracy, without even a start at gaining a ticket in carpentry, welding, plumbing, mechanics, electrical engineering, cabinet-making or some such, they’ve been very poorly served.
Dude. 70% of them ARE graduating…
The world needs ditch diggers too.
30% aren’t.
I think 30% is enough to be a problem.
If you don’t, how many would be?
[quote=“Jaboney”]30% aren’t.
I think 30% is enough to be a problem.
If you don’t, how many would be?[/quote]
Look, when I was in HS, dropouts were usually burnouts and losers.
It seems to me from reading your source article that many of these dropouts are making a financially wise choice. Is it the BEST choice for their long term education? No, of course not. But it seems that they are NOT going to adding to the bread lines.
Whether or not they become a future problem for the province as a whole cannot be determined. What kind of families do these kids come from? Middle class? Lower middle class working fams?
Their dads probably wish they were 30 years younger.
“It’s better to burn out than to fade away” Neil Young