
Furthermore, those that don't get the grades to go on to post secondary education, should be guided to trades, or other forms of further education, that will meet the demands of society. All free.

Yup. That's the attitude right there: "When I was young I started out with nothing..." What these students are saying is, "I wish I could start out with nothing."
In the time since the 60's the ratio of the median income of a family to the cost of an education has grown from about 2:1, to about 1:2. The cost of education has been increasing at a much higher rate than inflation since the 60's, and the educational requirements of most jobs has been growing in the meanwhile. We aren't even talking about houses, so what are you on about?
Students are demanding reasonable tuition, and your interpretation is that they want any living they want? Pay closer attention, please. I left the country and went to a university that cost 1/10th the price of the universities I went to in Canada. These are not unreasonable demands, but your attitude is.

Furthermore, those that don't get the grades to go on to post secondary education, should be guided to trades, or other forms of further education, that will meet the demands of society. All free.

What a steaming reeking pile of dung this premise is!
Quote has been trimmed, See full post:
In the early 60's i spent two fekking years working in the north to save money for my tuition at a trade school, i stayed there for months at a time also when others were "going to the city" every couple weeks to party and blow money. I had enough by then to go to university, barely, but did not want that.
When i decided to have a home i went to a rural area which was cheaper and lived like a mole in a hastily erected basement while i built the upper floor, had a wife and two kids by that time also. I had to learn carpentry the hard way and used to drive into town to a subdivision where the builders would tell me how to do something on their coffee break if i brought donuts. I know it sounds like 10 miles to school uphill both ways but this is the simple truth.
I got caught in the mortgage spiral when i was building in 1980 which nearly doubled my payments so i worked two jobs and toughed it out.
Nothing has changed regarding the ratio of annual wage to the coat of an ordinary home unless these poor entitled dip****s insist on a job and home in just the right area of a major city. Twas the same back then, too expensive for a middle income wage earner.
I have immediate family currently working in the boonies for the same reason. One nephew in particular is making over a hundred grand a year in the bush and saving 30 of it towards an education, another had the...

Yup. That's the attitude right there: "When I was young I started out with nothing..." What these students are saying is, "I wish I could start out with nothing."
In the time since the 60's the ratio of the median income of a family to the cost of an education has grown from about 2:1, to about 1:2. The cost of education has been increasing at a much higher rate than inflation since the 60's, and the educational requirements of most jobs has been growing in the meanwhile. We aren't even talking about houses, so what are you on about?
Students are demanding reasonable tuition, and your interpretation is that they want any living they want? Pay closer attention, please. I left the country and went to a university that cost 1/10th the price of the universities I went to in Canada. These are not unreasonable demands, but your attitude is.

I think you need to rethink this Bear. What needs to be done is for society to stop pushing University as the be all and end all. Stop having the attitude that the "smart ones" go to University and the "dumb ones" go to trade schools. I'll tell you right now, it takes a hell of a lot of smarts, hard work, AND education to become a good auto mechanic these days. Welding is a lot more than arc welding 2 pieces of steel together, plumbing is more complicated than gluing abs.
A hell of alot more training and education than the dummies with the degrees realize.

Excellent point. A friend that is a GM service manager told the local high school auto mechanics class that without a B average they would not make it as a mechanic these days.

I think you need to rethink this Bear. What needs to be done is for society to stop pushing University as the be all and end all. Stop having the attitude that the "smart ones" go to University and the "dumb ones" go to trade schools. I'll tell you right now, it takes a hell of a lot of smarts, hard work, AND education to become a good auto mechanic these days. Welding is a lot more than arc welding 2 pieces of steel together, plumbing is more complicated than gluing abs.

Or a tour in the Armed Forces. With a clause exempting you from combat if you so wish.

Conscription is forced enlistment. How about voluntary service, and a GI Bill, with a non combat clause?

It just seems contradictory. How useful is a serviceman who can't be forced to fight? I suppse you could try to blackmail him by giving him the choice between mine clearing and combat service. Seeing the first option is more dangerous, I suppose it would be a good way to test his sincerity in avoiding a combat role I suppose!

Conscription is forced enlistment. How about voluntary service, and a GI Bill, with a non combat clause?

There vast segment of the Armed Forces whose MOS is non combat in theory, such as WFE techs.
FORCES.CA - Water, Fuels and Environmental Technician
There are also special services that do not necessarily require combat ready Troops to do. Such as DART.

I'm not so sure about that. I don't agree with conscription either, don't get me wrong. But I think if you're going to volunteer to serve, then you volunteer to serve, period. If non-combat is the only choice for some (and it's a very valid choice), then they don't volunteer.
I also, at times, think that some nations that have some sort of mandatory service requirement, not necessarily armed forces but some sort of service requirement, are definitely onto something. There's value in learning to be of service to the collective whole of society. Just a random thought.

Yep, I don't think that's a bad idea at all. Especially in today's world, my own generation has seen many 'career' changes in our lifetimes, the generation coming up has it worse. Which makes that often singular decision upon graduation from high school all the more important to get 'right'. I think service of some kind, military or civilian, would not only give a young adult the time that is perhaps necessary to really contemplate that choice but would give them a sense of purpose while they were doing so.

But I think Germany provides free education too, if not in university, then at least in some trade or professional school.
So the mentality was different (i.e. each individual is responsible for the development of not just himself but of the country). Canada is far more individualistic.

Perhaps, but with all the equipment, salaries, training, etc. it can be expensive especially for an organization that guarantees employment for all.
1. salaries to be low enough to discourage sign-ups, since it would be intended more as a last resort for students graduating from high school in recessions and who feel uncomfortable borrowing for university for example.
2. Training and equipment costs might be unavoidable for them to do the work they need to do, but you might want it targetted more towards civilian purposes to contribute to the development of the economy, so it could include uran infrastructure construction and such too which the military doesn't do.
Sure the militaryu is an option too, but it is more specialized and so probably not ideal as an organizaiton which guarantees employment.

The Armed Forces guarantees employment for all?
The salary is low. But the bulk of your necessities are provided.
It doesn't?
FORCES.CA - Construction Technician
There is no employment guarantee in the Canadian Armed Forces, and the Forces are an extremely diversified organization.

It doesn't?
FORCES.CA - Construction Technician

Quebec is already the most heavily taxed province, you can only milk so much. These students are delusional, greedy and plain out of touch with reality. Their current tuition is the lowest in the country, I have zero sympathy for them.

What I meant was that it would be inapporpriate for an organization like the armed forces to guarantee employment for all, for various reasons, though the main one being the high salaries. Too many people would be willing to join, even among those not suited for the military.
While the military is diversified to a degree, it's still specialized enough that it does not deal with all aspects of government services, such as education, health care, etc.
For an organization guaranteeing employment for all who wish to join, you'd want to offer salaries far lower than the private sector so as to discourage people joining it, the intention of course being that people would join it as a last resort.
Secondly, since you might be dealing with people of a wide range of skills, abilities, intelligence, etc. to limit yourself to trades and professions which require more physical strength, etc. could be limiting, especially among those who are hard of hearing, with poor eyesight, out of shape, etc. in which case we may need to find them other types of work the military cannot provide.
This could include everything from teaching and health care for the more capable to infrastructure construction, administration, tree planting, etc. etc. etc. for whatever might be needed.

But then the military would need to be significantly redefined, whereby it would no longer be limited to work done on base, but also in civilian projects.
Also, seeing that it's first and foremost supposed to be a fighting force, would you really want it to have to be bogged down by various civilian employment and training programmes, etc.?