Was Mitt Romney’s 47 Percent comment out of Line?

Crystal L., 14, South Island School

  

        Mitt Romney recently made the comment that 47 percent of America are self-pitying freeloaders and think they are entitled to housing and do not pay taxes. there was a lot of backlash against this matter as people in the United States dislike him even more than they did before. Mitt Romney was certainly out of the line when he made this comment as even his father is part of the 47% and if it wasn’t for the hard work of his father, he wouldn’t be standing there making that comment that 47% of the American population isn’t important.

       47% of the American population is either elderly or people who work but do not earn enough to pay tax. Mitt Romney has never experienced financial issues since he was born into a privileged and wealthy lifestyle and didn’t really have to work for anything. He certainly was able to get a room full of rich people who paid 50,000 USD to go to the fundraiser to agree with his statement on the unimportant 47% of America. That just proves his arrogance and selfishness.

       Mitt Romney was also out of line when he implied that 47% of America thinks they are entitled to everything as if they were greedy and spoilt. I think that statement was ironic as he was the one born into a rich family where his father was a governor. Most of the 47% of the United States are only trying to find chances and opportunities to support themselves and their families. They are only trying to survive so when Mitt Romney made that comment it was almost like he was holding their lives against them.

       The speech was really disrespectful and mean and that wasn’t the only time he said something like that. He frequently takes speech out of context. He has taken Obama’s speech about teamwork out of context when he used the quote “You didn’t build that” against him when he started telling companies and organizations that Obama doesn’t think that you built your business and also Obama doesn’t give credit to a student who made the honor roll. I don’t think Obama meant he didn’t give individuals any credit. I think Obama meant that you can’t do anything alone like how Mitt Romney wouldn’t have made it that far without his father. Mitt Romney didn’t build his legacy, his father did and he completely ignored him when making that 47% speech.

       Overall, I don’t think much of America supports Mitt Romney. After his speech there have been a lot of haters and even though it was in private and he had the chance to apologize for it, he continued to back himself up. I think that the speech was so out of line there is no way that anyone would forgive him for saying that and it was certainly no accident. I don’t think he understands the American system because he grew up privileged and he shouldn’t have made that speech.

The Battle Between University Education and Vocational Training:

Vocational training—a more favored option as diplomas are watered down

Jimmy C. 12, RCHK

        One of the most important events of one’s life is the day when you sit down and take the test—the test that determines your career, your future and your status. The competition for entering the best universities and receiving degrees has grown to be more and more intense over the years, as more and more graduates strive for a good career in today’s competitive society. Because of this, more parents are encouraging their children to take on university education, to graduate, and to get a high-paying career. In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the number of graduates, which creates a problem. The growing number of graduates means that the degrees you earn and your diploma will decrease in value. With you graduation certificate becoming worthless, graduates will have a difficult time obtaining a sufficient job. There is a cure: don’t cram yourself into a university, and take on vocational training instead. Vocational training is superior to university education in today’s society because it helps you attain a more stable job, the tuition is cheaper, and vocational training provides a much more focused education.

         Firstly, adapting vocational training will assist you in finding a more stable career. Vocational training provides education and tutoring towards one specified career, such as a hotel servicer or an electrical engineer. Compared to university education, vocational training is much more focused on a career, whereas university education is mainly targeted at subjects such as biology or literature, as well as achievements such as degrees and diplomas. Because vocational training provides education associated with a specific career as well as real life situations, vocational training can provide many advantages that university education does not. One of these includes work experience. If you study a specific career, chances are you are more familiar with the procedures and the details of that career than if you study at university. This will help you get a more stable job as employers today look for employees with high standards and work experience. On the other hand, graduates will have a hard time searching for a career, as diplomas are too common. Graduates will also have to spend more time adapting to the career that they wish to do, as this is not included in the university curriculum. Another advantage that vocational training offers is the students learn actual skills that they would need to master in order for them to develop in a certain career. Again, this is not included in the process of university education. For example, a university student that studies English might wish to become an elementary teacher. However, the student might have mastered the knowledge of English, but they lack the skills that are required to tutor children. This advantage of learning skills for the career through vocational education is also a bonus to help you find a stable job.

         A second reason is that vocational training is dramatically less expensive compared to university education in terms of tuition fees. The major reason why university education is significantly more expensive than vocational education is because universities are not only just places that provide education like schools; universities also act as research centers as well as other facilities. Students, through tuition fees, provide much of the financial support that is required to conduct these facilities and research centers. Being able to save money throughout the duration of education is very useful as you can make use of the money wisely to help you develop your future career. The money that you can save by adapting vocational education can also be used for life savings in case of an emergency. For the past few years, the cost for university education ahs rapidly risen by 6.5%, a massive increase that has caused financial difficulties for many university students. Considering the expensive cost for university education, it would be good to choose vocational training. Choosing vocational training also help you avoid entering into debt since the tuition is less expensive. In contrast, two-thirds of all graduates leaving university also take a massive debt with them, with the average debt up to $23,000 US dollars, or equivalent to $178,392 Hong Kong Dollars.

         Furthermore, vocational training provides a more focused education on a certain career compared to university education, which teaches a wide range of subjects. Because of this focused education, vocational training lets you focus on developing and advancing on your dream career. Students who adapt vocational education are more likely to be committed and determined towards a single career, as they have the skills and the experience derived from the “focused” style of education that employers are looking for. In fact, a survey revealed that 62% of young teenagers in the United Kingdom know what occupation they wish to be. “With a vocational qualification, you’re more likely to be able to start working sooner, giving you the experience you need to back up what you’re learning,” comments Dick Winterton, the managing director of City & Guilds Awards. In contrast, university education graduates will not be as devoted towards a specific career as vocational training students do. This is partially because the knowledge university graduates will get them a range of similar jobs, which gives them a hard time deciding which job to settle on. This is also partially because, as mentioned before, diplomas and degrees are decreasing in worth and value. Despite providing work experience and skills for the occupation, vocational training also does a better job in letting students understand how the society works in order to become successful in the future.

         To sum up, vocational training is a great alternative for young people who have strong determination for a career. Vocational training is less expensive; more focused compared to university education, and will guarantee a more stable job. After all, Bill Gates never took on university, yet he still became one of the richest people in the world!

Should Schools Have Debentures at All?

Adrian T., 13, GSIS

        Recently, ESF have increased the amount of debentures to a staggering HKD $500,000. This debenture is a non-refundable amount in which a well-to-do parent will pay the school in order to secure a place for their child in the school should they meet the admission requirements of the school. This move by ESF has been criticized for favoring the rich over the poor and will take away places for less-well-off families. ESF schools are subsidized by the government to provide an alternative for those who do not want to go to local schools (or cannot because of the lack of Cantonese skills), and cannot afford the school fees offered by the international schools. If ESF schools implement this system, they may be in danger of having their government subsidies taken away from them and forced to go private, in which it would raise the school fees and directly affect less wealthy families. Although this system may help raise money for repairing and renovating ESF schools, they are sending the wrong signal to those who want to go to ESF schools. This brings up a very good point that is ripe for debate: Should schools have a debenture system? In my opinion, I think that schools should not have a debenture system, as education and school placement should not involve money except for school fees.

        Education is a right that everybody is entitled to. Every child, no matter rich or poor, should be allowed to have a decent education in order to give them a fair start to life. Education should not be associated with a monetary value, and schools should choose students according their skills and abilities, not according to whether they can pay or not. Education is not a market; it is a place where a child can learn so that they can be better equipped to be a fruitful member of our society. If we put the buying power of their parents, something they have no choice over, then we would be throwing away our society’s cherished values of fairness and equality. This would then send a very adverse and strong message to the people of Hong Kong: Education can be bought, and money is the leading factor when applying for a school. This is not the message we want to send to parents in Hong Kong and the people that will potentially immigrate to Hong Kong. This will in turn undermine Hong Kong’s moral values and create a bad impression for Hong Kong.

        Having a debenture will also potentially affect a close-knit school community. Let’s say some people come into a school because of the newly implemented debenture policy. The people who come into this school will therefore be less qualified but have super rich parents. If the school community is less well-off, then they will not be able to integrate into the school community because they are inferior to the others because they are relatively richer than the other students are. They may also look down on others for being not as rich, or the others may exclude them for being richer than they are. This would create a whole bunch of problems for the community and the pros will outweigh the cons. In addition, the rich kids that came into this school because of this debenture system may not be as smart and so they may lower the school’s standard.

        Some people say that the implementing of a debenture system will help ease the burden of the other parents as they will not have to pay too many school fees due to the revenue generated from the debentures. However, I disagree. There are so many other risks and controversial free ways to get more money for the school such as applying for government subsidies, asking more well of parents to donate some money, starting a fundraiser, etc. These methods are much more effective than having to implement a debenture system that will put the school’s reputation, standard, and society’s values at risk.