Hacker News Reader

Comment by MouseTown | Hacker News Reader

You have the “right” as much as the next person but society is most benefited from those with experience helping those without.

The argument that you deserve to watch TV all day because you once had a job is curious.

View on HN

> The argument that you deserve to watch TV all day because you once had a job is curious.

How so? I think you're missing the most important part of my comment, which was about encouraging children to discover their passions and achieve self-sufficiency.

It's not about "once holding a job." It's about being able to take care of yourself. I'm not saying that I like the idea of spending the latter part of my years being unproductive, but that the wealth accrued during those productive years gives one the ability to do that.

If I'm not dependent on anyone, if I worked and saved in order to earn that life for myself, then yes I deserve to pursue my own happiness whatever that means for me and it's no one else's business or place to dictate otherwise.

Let's imagine a very talented 10 year-old who earns a billion dollars (perhaps they're a media star or very gifted technically, whatever the reason, they have earned this money through their own efforts rather than inheriting it) and has had themselves legally emancipated. Would you feel comfortable with this child deciding they are now going to exclusively watch television for the remainder of their life?

If a 10 year-old somehow managed to get themselves legally emancipated (that's a crucial piece of context that you offered) AND had earned 10 billion dollars to sustain themselves for the rest of their lives then yes, absolutely without question. They have every moral right, and my full approval, to do whatever they want to with their one shot here on earth. I'm more than perfectly comfortable with it and it's none of my business.

Most people while you are working, save money in the retirement plan. So when they retire, they are just using the money they saved, not living out ot thin air.

In some jobs, old people can still contribute. But other jobs like that require a lot of physical strength are almost impossible.

An extreme case are sports. After some age, your body is just not good enough. Some can transition to being a coach or reporter. Some are only good at kicking a ball. If they are good enough to make millions of people happy, why can't they save some of the money they earn and have a nice life?

Then by your argument, there should be no young teachers as what the hell kind of experiences could they possibly have to teach?

Most of the job of a teacher is being a publicly appointed babysitter.

Much of the rest is teaching the basics, which, as a functional adult, they should have decades of experience with.

You'd be amazed at the number of "functional adults" that are lousy babysitters

Teachers don’t teach experiential knowledge

That is probably the saddest thing I have read all day.

The best teachers I ever had were the ones that taught the subject material but from a relatable manner based on their years of experience. Yes, the best teachers I personally had were older.

Feels like you’re making emotional appeals to make the previous responder look out of touch in this post, and the previous, in opposite directions.

The best teachers I ever had were kind, smart, and well funded.

The first post was that old timers not sharing their experiences was bad which in my mind extrapolates to old timers should all be teachers.

The second post was that acknowledging the fact that teachers no longer teach but instruct based on a preset curriculum arranged to get grades for specific tests higher.

The fuzzy logic in my head might not be clear to me let alone others, but I feel you're trying to make something out of nothing as well.

Probably all of the experience they gained by getting a degree and becoming certified to teach, for a start

Reply on news.ycombinator.com