Whatever happened to responsibility? Whatever happened to being accountable for one's own actions?

I know I have mentioned this time and time again, be it the reason that people ban so quickly or the lack of respect people have for each other, but right now, I'm just seriously irritated because Washington, DC is going to give middle school students $100 for doing their work.

Um, what?

Yes, that's right. People are not responsible enough anymore, so they're going to pay them in order to do what they should be doing on their own. Let's face it: education is a gift in and of itself and while the US educational systems could improve a lot, it's free as it is.

But here's the kicker: what are these kids going to spend the money on? God only knows. Violent videogames, drugs? So in an effort to get people to do what they should be doing, they're failing. Hard.

Why not take that money and instead invest it further into people's educations? Essentially the government is paying the kids to teach themselves rather than paying the schools in order to become better teachers. Anyone else find this wrong? Or, why don't they give kids something to do in order to enrich themselves such as arts programs or sports or some extracurricular they would not usually receive? Woodshop, anyone?

The point: we no longer expect personal responsibility of our society. We no longer expect kids to do well in their classes because they want to learn and because they are taking this gift (or this right, depending upon how you see it) and putting it to the best use. What is our society coming to if we cannot nourish the youth with good values?

I grew up in a family that respected one another and I sure as heck was taught to be a responsible person. I understand and mourn the fact that this does not happen in many families and oftentimes television, videogames and even gangs are left to raise children. It's not right, of course.

But now our government has failed our youth. Our last hope has failed us--and now this generation will learn that in order for them to feel the need to do something that benefits themselves and benefits society then they must be paid for it.

Alas. Prepare for a generation even worse than the one that rules now.

*shudders*


All I can say is that this really and truly frightens me. Do we have so little faith in people that we must bribe them to do what they are supposed to be doing in the first place? This sickens me.

Its like saying that nothing is worth doing if there isn't compensation. This move is cheapening their whole school experience. What are they really going to learn if the only reason to do their work is for money, not the learning.

Maybe this is the time to get out of the country now. It seems to only be going more and more down the toilet. :(

Yes and no. I mean, moving out of the country wouldn't be so bad except that America would fall into more decay and bring the world down with it because it's so powerful. We need to change things while we're ahead. Running away, sadly, won't do any good.

I wouldn't say they are loosing faith, they are gettind desperate. You know how hard it is in some areas to get the parents - let alone the kids - to give a shit? It generally starts in the household in most cases where the parents don't do their job, as parents, to do the parenting and drag their children's sorry butt to school. XD

Believe it or not, there are kids that grow up being fed the idea that they are not good enough for school so they are set up right from the start to fail. They figure it won't help them - according to their life style thanks to things like gangs, drugs, and bad parents/teachers - so they don't even try. I used to volunteer at an elementary school and more than twice a week I came home crying because of what I hear some of these kids parents say. You wouldn't believe how little some parents care about a child's education. And it rubs off, unbelievably so, on the kids.

When you say they are paying elementary kids to go and attend class and do their work... I bet the parents are getting that money.

It is not their fault, usually it is their upbringing.

edit: Paying them, I agree won't really help. That's money which is nothing compared to a person who cares and is willing to help them realize they are good enough for any school if they just try. Maybe they are hoping they will use it for school supplies so they won't have to worry about paying for them?

I'm not really blaming the kids as much as I am blaming the government. I'll blame the kids in a couple years when they're older. :lol:

And I know that many people don't care about their kids' educations; that bothers me, but that's not what I'm referring to here.

What I'm referring to is the fact that the school systems--and the government--are doing nothing to tell the kids that they can do things on their own for their own benefits. Basically these kids are now being taught that money is their only motivation. And money can be a great motivator, I know, but it shouldn't be the only motivator.

The government should take this money and invest it in the schools. Give the kids music programs and extracurricular activities and intermerial sports teams and teach them that money doesn't have to be the motivator: success doesn't come in the form of dollars but in one's personal accomplishments. Giving them--or their parents, as you pointed out--money is only making things worse.

edit: oops I usually get into a rut when I start talking about that, forgot to add my two cents about the government.

Link I found on it. In one blog, they are saying how excited they are about the program. I'm thinking how confused I am at wanting to put aside 2.8 million just for this program. 2.8 million... are their heads in the clouds? They were explaining that they would be opening bank accounts for each kid so my guess is that they won't be able to touch the money immediately... o.O

http://www.dcedublog.com/2008/08/middle-sc...earn-up-to.html

While I heavily support saving money for the future, this is the wrong way to go about it. Firstly, it still doesn't teach responsibility for what do the kids learn from it? Save money for later? Nope. The government gave you free money for later? Yep.

And I still think that they should take the money and put it into programs. Why not use the money to make classes to help the kids learn how to save money, balance checkbooks, compute sales tax and other things that will actually be useful? Money doesn't compound that well in savings and/or checkings accounts very well anyhow; they ought to invest it in Roth IRAs . . . which they definitely aren't learning by just getting free money. I understand that's a lot for a kid to comprehend--IRAs and the like--but it would be better if they were actually learning something about this experience.

(Thanks for the link.)

OY MY GOD! that's the reaction me and my roommates had to that. Seriously? That's so stupid! School is supposed to teach responsibility not pay their students to work in an effort to teach it. It's quite simple, actually. No do homework? you fail. Do your homework and you pass! Really, what's so hard about just teaching that?

I completely agree, my parents started showing me the bills and showing me how to fill checks out and such when I was in elementary. I got in middle school and she took me to the bank with her. I reached high school and I was driving to the bank to run erronds for and with them. XD But high school does provide a business class that teaches you things like you mentioned. The money could also be used for better supplies for teachers within the classrooms. Better books, a better enviroment to learn in.

I grew up and my parents taught me that getting an education was the best if not one of the best things I could do for myself. They though of education as a priveledge that should be taken advantage of and that is what they taught me to view it as. We don't want kids to suddenly start thinking, "Well if you don't pay me, then I am not going to school."

The government have completely missed the memmo... A healthy education, not a bribed one, is the greatest investment - aside from coffee...

Oh my, government is bribing kids to study now? D: People have sunk so low... *places her hand on her chest looking upset* I feel like doing a dramatic scene throwing myself on the ground, yelling "NOOOOOOOOOOO!"

...I could use the money. (I is poooor) But still! I object because of so many reason, some of which were mentioned and I feel no urge to throw in anything.

Actually, I'm a part of this generation you speak of... the one that normally does not give a damn about doing well in classes and school and the like. That's why I'm moving to Canada as soon as I can.

Although my family could use the extra money, I gain a better sense of... achievement, I think is the right word, when I get really good grades and do it all on my own steam (mostly because I don't get paid for better grades - though sometimes we do go out to more expensive dinner if I do really well on exams and the like).

Besides, that makes it really like... work. However nerdy it may sound, I like to learn because I'm curious about a lot of things that go on and I want to know how things work out. But to be paid... it makes it like work, for someone like me, I wouldn't enjoy it any more. In fact, I might hate it to think that it is... work... child labor even in some cases.

Plus, I can really see a child who is honestly to god struggling in classes, but wants to learn, and then they 'fire' the kid from all schools or something because the kid isn't getting good enough grades so there is no point in teaching them and no point in paying them.

Ok, wtf????

So if we lived in Washington my little sister would be bringing in 100 dollars after every school day? That's PREPOSTEROUS.

Most middle schoolers are more than capable of learning without having to be bribed. It's like giving dogs treats to stop peeing on the floor. Don't get me wrong, there's lots of stuff I could do with that money like get a copy of the new Soul Caliber 5 like give it to my PARENTS. But still, that's...gross.

I don't think they get the money every day but at the end of a term or the end of the year.

Okay, get this: I am a junior high school student suffering from the "normal" junior high school pressures: parents, popularity, friends (or lack thereof), etc. I don't get that money, but all of the cool kids or all of my friends do. So what do I do?

I stop trying.

Why should I try if I know I am going to fail and I know that everyone else is going to know that I didn't get the money?

Unfortunately, there's a reason that kids have to be given money to get them to study. It's because, especially where I live, many kids these days don't seem to give two sh**s about school, their futures, or anything that isn't about either the latest fashions or the newest bands. Which is a shame, because that money could be used in some essential programs....like physical education, or any of the core classes. While I'd love to say that banking/useful classes that teach kids how to be adults would be...well...good in a high school/middle school setting, there's one issue to this. The Kids Don't Care. That's it. They don't give a damn. Kids, especially the women in today's society, (I am a woman, before I hear one flame saying that I'm sexist...) are taught that you can get by by looking good, or by finding a rich S.O.B to take care of you and give you money. Or, they can do my personal favorite in today's society, and pop out kid after kid for the welfare money. (And I'm not bashing all welfare/govt. assistance people. Just the ones who truly CAN do something about their situation) So, yeah. Not much to be done, unfortunately. Although I would like to see that money used on things that people need....like a better economy or something...

So now this can be reinforced by giving them money for things in life that they shouldn't be given money for.

And this is why we need that money to put into programs which teach kids that they can be something better than they think they can be. They can be a musician or they can be an auto mechanic or they can be a doctor . . . they don't have to live a life of drugs or violence or gangs or hate.

LOVE the assumption that all these kids will use the potential money on drugs and then become gang members. Because that's what all of you did when you were in school, right?

These kids won't be getting the money for going to school, they'll be getting it for getting good marks and staying out of trouble. You can't have it both ways. Staying out of trouble, to me, includes not doing drugs or joining gangs. If you're doing drugs and part of a gang, what are the chances of you having the time to study to get good marks?

My experience of both me and my sister having failed high school is that grades don't mean much. So what if I don't have an A? But if I miss out on $100, I'm gonna be pissed off. I'm gonna work bloody hard to get that A. Money is a better motivator. In fact, my sister skipped her classes so she could work and afford the things my mother couldn't afford to buy for her.

I think this idea has great potential if it's done right.


Brandy, your gender doesn't have anything to do with whether you discriminate. I agree that you weren't being sexist, but only because you were stating fact. It's perfectly possible to be female and sexist towards females at the same time.

Vanity- Very very true. But you have no idea how many times I've said what I said before in public and got told I was a sexist for it. No. I'm not. I know plenty of women who aren't in that jumble and who work their asses off to be responsible, self-reliant adults. Hell, I'm one of those. So, yeah. :)

For the record, I A) Do not think women should lord over men B) Do not think that men should lord over women and C) Wish like hell we could all just get along and act like adults. :)

No, I don't think all of these people will be using the money for drugs or gangs. I just think that it's a possibility.

But the bottom line is that this is a very poor way to go about fixing a problem because it hides the problems within our society. If children are not getting the confidence they need to succeed in life from within their families, they need to find it somewhere. Providing them with money for doing well in school isn't teaching them anything except that if they want to achieve a goal, there should be money behind it.

If this money were used for, say, a school band where everyone got to play an instrument, then they could learn to have fun, to be responsible and practice after school or before school, to play with a group, to try something new, to accomplish something. If they just get money . . . they get money.

This is fail plan in action.

It does teach them how to achieve the goal, though.

Many people set goals. Lots of people fail to attain their goals because they're just desires or dreams. When you set goals properly, you also set yourself a reward for when the goal is attained, and that reward is what motivates you to achieve your goal. People who do this are far more successful at attaining their goals than people who don't.

So what the schools are doing is setting the goal of getting good marks for the children and giving them the reward of money. Children are consumers. Keeping up with the Joneses is more rampant when you're a teenager than at any other time. It's a good motivator.

Schools have tried using other motivators in the past. Certificates, gold stars, you name it. Is money abhorrent because it's a reward or becuase it has value outside the school?




And no matter what you say, they will learn something. If the goal is for them to get the marks they will have to learn to get those marks.

Let me put it this way:

Education costs money. The only reason why public schools are free is because it's paid for with taxes. If you don't go to a public school, you pay money at a private because an education is not free.

So basically you're not only getting a free education, but you're also getting paid for it? Um, no.

Economically speaking, the world revolves around money. That I agree.

But does that mean that we need to tell people that the only reason they should ever accomplish anything is because there is money behind it? No. If they want money, they should get a job.

And I find it disturbing that you think that giving children money to fuel popularity is a good thing. Because after all, we know that kids place a lot of value on clothing and appearances . . . and that isn't what they should be learning at such a critical point in their lives.

They should be learning that they are more than money and they are more than consumer goods. They should be learning that they are more than money and that there are things far more valuable than money. Extracurricular activities have a chance of uniting people . . . money will only tear them apart.

Yes, because this is just so much different from getting good things, like maybe toys and such, for doing your work and getting high marks when you were in school.

It's called an incentive. And schools in the Washington DC area are AWFUL. For the most part - you have to use incentives to get kids to care because the areas and the schools are often times, PISS POOR.

And who really is going to give a damn about these kids? Society? Society has demonstrated it's failure in caring because no school in the nation's capital should be as horrendous as they are. That's a failure. When the parents aren't there, these kids have to learn how to fend for themselves. That's a reality that neither you, nor I, have faced.

It's a possibility that kids can use it on Drugs. This happens EVERYWHERE, and is completely irrelevant. Here is a hint - most kids usually don't care too much about funding their college educations unless they're from that kind of home - and in which case, these people are more concerned about survival than simply stashing a bit of money away. The "They might spend it on DRUGS!" line was presumptuous - and it's a faulty assumption to be made just because you see kids from a poorer area getting money because their schools are subpar.

It's between that or not having an education.

That's pretty much it. That's the goal with those who are quite wealthy. Dreams and enjoyment and other sweet things mean crap when it comes to having to pay bills and deal with life when you don't have any money. Money is an amazing motivator. Why should school be any different? You go to school because you want to? How many kids, even in good school districts, LIKE going to school? So, imagine people in a poorer district, and how they must feel about going to school every day, in oftentimes, dilapidated buildings, where there is no incentive to even make it out?

No matter in which way you put it - these kids are earning money through their own hard work. By working and staying in school - which, in a place like DC, is work in it's own right - they're doing a job. And to be a doctor and all those other sweet, beautiful things that really only middle-class kids can even afford to dream about - takes MONEY.

The problem in our society is that we have such subpar school systems in different parts of the area. You wouldn't HAVE to pay kids money if there was another incentive to go to school or if the kids could actually feel decent about themselves and not have to be behind their peers in a wealthier neighborhood in terms of curriculum.

Exactly. That's why the money should be used for programs which will benefit the kids.

And yes, I know that society is going to do very little to help them. I'm very much aware of that. Which is why this needs to be stopped now and that money used in other ways to help the kids so that when they are adults they will look back on school and realize that they got something out of it.

I'm not saying that the kids shouldn't get the money and see benefits. They shouldn't get cash in their pockets (or in the bank). They should see an improvement in the world around them.

Let's say they start a music program. (Haha, I like music; it's a good example.) The kids learn how to play instruments--something they're never going to learn because they don't have the money to finance lessons on their own. They are not only learning a skill but they are also learning how to be a team player and how to cooperate with others. They are still benefiting from the money, but they are learning things other than cash is good and that they need money as a motivator in life.

The music bands and orchestras and whatnot can perform for their communities. I'm sure it won't be a hit at first, but eventually it'll grow. And thus they will learn that they can benefit their community through something as simple as music.

Fend for themselves with what? So they can use the money to buy a new pair of designer jeans so that they can impress their friends? No, I do not claim to be worse off than any of these kids; I believe I said that at the beginning.

But see here: $100 is going to come and go in a flash and the kids will learn nothing from it. Music, sports, arts, etc will give them a new taste of what life has to offer; it'll give them skills and memories to last for a lifetime. Junior high schoolers are at a very impressionable age. They may want that $100 more than they want to hold a paintbrush in an art class, but just because someone wants something doesn't mean that it's better for him or her. An improvement in the school system would improve these kids' lives; $100 won't.

Yes, it happens everywhere. But that doesn't mean it's irrelevent. I know people who if they were given $100 would spend it on drugs. I'm not saying that we shouldn't be giving poor kids money because they'll spend it on drugs. I'm saying that we shouldn't be giving any kids money as an incentive for their education.

At that age, there are very few kids, regardless of background, who care about their college education. And you know what? College isn't for everyone. But at that age, they're not thinking about college. (Really, at that age the only thing they're thinking about is "is this cool?". I know . . . I remember being that age.) They need someone--and since families fail them, they only have schools--to give them an extra nudge in the right direction.

I feel sorry for people who think that the only thing in life is money. You can have a completely enjoyable life without money; likewise, you can have a completely crappy life with your pockets stuffed full of cash. Sure, there's no doubt that less money means some things in life will be harder; I'm not disputing that. However, life isn't all about money. And these kids need to learn that there are other things in life that can make them happy. They grow up seeing poverty and dispair and parents struggling to pay bills--they need to learn that while money is important, it's not the most important.

No, school isn't a job. And just because you go to school in a poor neighborhood doesn't mean that your elementary school career is worse than someone in a nicer neighborhood. Everyone has issues and some families really suck--even some of the richer ones.

It's hard to go to school when you live in a poor neighborhood and no one encourages education; it's hard to go to school when you live in a rich neighborhood and you're trying to keep your classmates from finding out that your homelife is falling apart. Children all over are facing great dilemas they really shouldn't be facing. But that doesn't mean that we need to give up on the poor kids and just give them money in order to sedate them for awhile longer. They--along with middle class and rich children--need to grow and learn.

Once again . . . which is why if you institute extracurricular activities, the kids will have something fun to look forward to, and they will learn from it.

I'm not against money, don't think me wrong. I'm a capitalist indeed. However, I believe there are more important things in life and to give people money as an incentive for something which is a gift already is wrong. Yes, colleges cost money, but $100 isn't going to buy you a college education. One hundred dollars will buy the children a new pair of shoes--or drugs--they can show off to their buddies and impress their peers.

Teaching children the value of hard work, responsibility and that life isn't about money will get them into college. They can show colleges that they grew--even if it was something that influenced them in junior high--into a great person and they can get into college. Tell colleges that you got a nice and shiny pair of shoes . . . eh. Not nearly as impressive.

I would love to be paid $100 to get good grades. However, I am a college student, and for us, poverty is a sign of honor.

I'm not surprised or astounded by this incentive. I come from a "well-off" middle class neighborhood and went to high school with people with similar financial backgrounds. However, in addition to the several large, pretty neighborhoods, my high school was also surrounded by apartment complexes and as a result, there were a lot of students who came from lower income families. My junior year, our school decided that those students could help their parents to pay the rent by getting good grades. For every A or B, their rent would be cut off by a certain percentage, so their parents could be up to 20% less rent each month so long as their kids did well in school. And 20% of apartment rent is definitely more than $100. :X So, the whole "$100 to kids who get good grades" doesn't faze me since 1] I don't think it will even work, and if it does, it won't work as well as they think it will; and 2] Several schools are already doing similar incentive programs all over the nation, it just doesn't come in the form of supposedly handing a kid $100 up front and saying "Keep up the good work, Johnny!"

I also look at it this way: School-sponsored scholarships, grants... That money could be used to make a new playground or buy instruments for kids in band. Instead, it goes to individuals who are driven to succeed because they'll get money to pay for school.

I'd like to see some articles on this, btw. Details, please? Like how they're going to determine what "good grades" are, how they're going to give it to the kids, etc.

EDIT: I found two: This and this.

I agree with this.

Also, $100 doesn't buy much. So saying it'll buy drugs... lol. That doesn't make much sense to me because the students who get the money are going to be the ones that did well before, because they're not lazy, and if they do well in school chances are they're not involved in drugs or gangs. The ones who are involved in those things are probably the lazy ones who never went to class, never did work, etc. and they probably aren't going to keep up the good, studious behavior for very long. Plus, it says the money will be put in a debit card. How many drug dealers and gang leaders carry card machines around?

*sighs and shakes head*

How sad is it that we must bribe our youth with money when there are so many other valuable ways that money could be put to use to help the kids.

And helping them pay for rent is disgusting. I'm all for responsibility, but there are some things you shouldn't make kids do. Making them responsible for their parents' rent is way too much.

PS: I didn't include links because this is a rant, not a debate. Were it meant to be a debate--which I suppose it has turned into--I would have included adequate information.

How could you not foresee this turning into a discussion or debate? XD It's about our ~future~ and of course everyone has an opinion where money is concerned. As it is, you just kind of ripped off a headline and then ranted about it, which wasn't fair since a lot of people seem to be discussing without knowing the details. You didn't mention the debit card, for instance, which is a huge difference between giving kids actual cash and only letting them use it in places that take debit cards. Actually, talking about drugs and stuff, maybe you didn't know about that detail before you started ranting.

As for making kids pay rent... Um? They're going to school, not working the streets. Incentive for parents to become more involved in their children's school work is far from disgusting. You're not making kids responsible for paying rent; it's to help parents and kids become more involved. :innocent:

To me, the ends justify the means. If in order to make kids get the most out of their education, we should pay them, then pay them. Theoretically that makes sense, but, as I already said, it's not going to work. It may sound disgusting or irresponsible to you but in that case, shouldn't you see charity as irresponsible as well? Welfare? Shouldn't these people be helping themselves rather than relying on us to make them responsible, just like these middle schoolers?

The world, especially this country, revolves around money. Money is the biggest incentive. Good grades => Money, as well as intelligence. Makes sense to me. Oh, and, you're talking about how this money can go to helping the kids. Using it as an incentive for them to get grades IS helping them. Assuming it all goes according to plan and they don't forget what they learned over the summer, lulz.

With the NCLB act, this will never happen.

Yes, they're totally going to see a change in the world around them when there are drug dealers and drivebys in their neighborhoods, and when the risk of them being shot in the head by a stray bullet is a stark reality when they walk to school, or merely sit in their room. Meanwhile, their mother may have to work 2 jobs just to make rent and feed these kids. With that, the government will continue to ignore their plight for the next shiny thing in another country.

Yes - they're learning social skills. My issue with that as an example is - they'll learn social skills in school anyway. And who is to say that these kids won't learn to enjoy their subjects with the money as an added incentive?

Because you're totally positive that this money is going to Designer jeans. Nevermind the fact that this money may be going to feed their families. Nevermind this money may be going to pay the bills. But we're just concerned about it going to fund frivolous things. And if we want to talk about frivolity, let us remember that many high-school age kids that work are spending parts of their money on prom.

Skills may help you. Sure they will. But memories and different things in life - still - will not put food on the table. You keep forgetting that these kids are in poverty - these aren't middle-class kids that are just going to completely waste the money. More often than not, the parents are going to be telling their kid that a certain cut of the money goes to them. And remember - when you work, money, is still the incentive for going out and dragging your ass to work. Money is not the only thing, but it's a pretty damn major thing.

Which these schools are doing - by paying them. By telling them that hard work is rewarded with money - the same thing that jobs tell you. The same thing that going into the right major in college tells you.

In a perfect world, we wouldn't have to. In a perfect world, all kids should have an equal, high-quality and enjoyable education. But they're not getting that.

You missed a big part of that first statement. It's hard to go to school when you live in a poor neighborhood, education is not valued, you may be shot when going to school, the facilities are dilapidated, the teachers are subpar, and then you look at a school like ones in suburban areas that are doing many times better, where the kids learn that the sky is the limit, because the money tends to be there.

That's a lot more important and a lot more stark and grim than simply having issues and trying to keep it secret from your classmates. Who the hell cares about their opinions? You won't have to see them again when you leave school.

Yes, they should grow and learn. And again, that goes back to my statement that schools are subpar. Fix the schools, and the money thing won't have to be an issue. What makes so much more of a difference than that is environment. When the environment is horrible, kids won't do too well.

In their case, $100 will possibly feed their families, pay some bills and potentially keep them with a roof over their head. No, it might not be fair that children have such a hefty responsibility on their shoulders, but you don't know how poverty is and how difficult it can be. What they're doing is hard work - you and I just didn't get money for our hard work as much as these kids do when we were smaller.

Dreams and "the Sky is the limit" and simple skills will not reward those who are poor in this world. That's like going into a third world nation, not giving them anything, but telling them in the meantime, "Just dream and hope that another country is going to help you out of your plight." Dreaming and harping on memories is a middle-class luxury - where people don't have to worry about where their next meal is going to come from, or if they're going to survive the next day.

Also, this also turned into a debate not just for reasons that Sunday stated, but because some of your premises are predicated on stereotypes - particularly the "Drugs" and "New shoes" and "Designer Jeans" stuff. Sounds really close to another stereotype that I know quite well - originated with the Moynihan Report.

Of course I didn't do research before I posted here: it's a friggen rant. I do debates for school and I do rants for fun.

Anyway, I don't want to leave this thread with any hard feelings between us, so I'm just going to end it here. Obviously you guys believe one way and I believe another and while I do not agree with you, I think it's best if it ended now. You can say that I'm backing out if you will, but I'm not: I just think that debating on the internet is pointless. And now I've had my annual internet debate.

That's why I'm glad I'm in Finland because educationally this is pretty much "a perfect world". We offer equal education for everyone, which is made possible with free education till 9th grade and from there up...it's still free but you will have to pay for your own books and such. Goes with university too. Plus we have the board of education looking over all of the schools for good quality of education, making sure they don't teach us BS etc.

Sure not everyone will enjoy school but that's their problem (matter of taste) and they will go through the basic education and they will go through high school or vocational school if they actually wanna have a job in the future, despite the what ever hateful feelings they might have (I've never met a person who would just hate school, some might just be a bit lazy or having a bit hard time learning). If they have trouble in school...they will have the chance for special tutoring and all...

But that's enough praising our education system...
What I think is that while the money could encourage parents to push their kids to school, it has bad sides too. I think it's a wrong way to try and make kids feel giddy about school andcertainly not the way to make one learn. Making the teaching varying and enjoyable, even fun, is more important than that 100$.
If they are poor, and their families are poor, they should get money for that but not from the school (who gets it from the government). Why not just cut the middle hand and give the money directly from the government to the families in need. Or even better, throw a few bucks at the schools too so they could get better equipment and offer better level of education.

But that's just my humble opinion.