My high school is a con artist! I am graduating this year and I feel like I am in the office at least once every week paying for one thing or another. I think it is unfair to students that schools not only charge us for so many things, but are raping us in the process. This week I paid fifty bucks for a drama banquet dinner, and last week it was eighty dollars for graduation tickets. Yearbook is seventy five dollars, cap and gown thirty five dollars, prom tickets like one hundred fifty bucks. These are only a few of the things that have come up in the past couple of weeks. It is ridiculous how expensive it is get a public education in this day and age.
I am lucky that my parents make enough money to be able to pay for all the “necessary” items for school. It would be very difficult to go through high school not knowing if I would be able to purchase the cap and gown I need in order to graduate with the rest of my class.
Schools should cut back on some of the things they charge us on. I know we cannot receive everything for free, but I definitely believe that schools (ASB in particular) are trying to make a profit. It is wrong and should be stopped, but I don’t know where to go first.
A drama banquet dinner, graduation tickets, caps and gowns, yearbooks, prom? When I think of things that are "necessary" for education, I think of textbooks, teachers, and classrooms. The things that you mention are fun extras that ultimately aren't "necessary" at all. In my experience, the funding that most public schools receive is inadequate to cover even the REAL necessities, much less all these frivolous extras. I can remember my mother (a recently retired high school math teacher) complaining not too very long ago because she had to start paying to make copies of tests and handouts out of her own pocket, because her district no longer had room it its budget to pay for a copy machine. Applying a user fee to extracurricular activities and services makes a lot of sense to me.
TTFN,
Blackout
---
A question of love.
---
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
One could argue that in order to participate in the graduation ceremony (something many consider one of the few rites of passage we have left in our society) that purchasing of the cap and gown, as well as tickets for close family members, so they can actually watch you, are, in fact, necessities.
The other things, though, I agree, are not necessities.
I am treated as evil by people who claim that they are being oppressed because they are not allowed to force me to practice what they do. ~D. Dale Gulledge
I do think graduation ceremony is one thing most students shouldn't have to miss out on. My school actually got us our caps and gowns for free, and I think they gave us 5 free tickets a-piece. Maybe this is b/c my school is a "poor" school and they know their students can't afford certain extravagant fees.
...but the question is can one SUPPORT that argument in a rational manner? What it is about the graduation ceremony that you find "necessary?" It doesn't change the value of one's diploma. It doesn't increase one's value in the job market in any way. It doesn't improve one's skills in ANY subject that a school teaches. The only purpose I see for such a ceremony is to stroke the ego of a student (or more likely, the egos of a student's family).
TTFN,
Blackout
---
A question of love.
---
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
Please report it to the police. If that was hyperbole, nevermind.
While I 100% agree with Blackout's comment, I recognize that it is difficult to eschew these frills when they have come to be expected traditions. We had to pay for all these things when I was in school, too. They were much less expensive when I was in school, but the average high school job paid $4 an hour back then, too.
But I digress. As Blackout said, banquets, yearbooks, graduation gowns, etc are extras, but it is sad that low income students will end up missing out on these traditions because they have become so expensive. That is especially sad when it comes to graduation-related extras, as low-income students need to see other low-income students enjoying that tradition.
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
We are a capitalist society, and one unfortunate reality of all captialist societies is that there will always be "haves" and "have nots." Rather than approaching this from the point-of-view that it "isn't fair" to low income students, I would suggest seeing user fees for these non-essential frills as a means of encouraging the "haves" to give money to the schools that can in turn be used to compensate for the financial shortfall that most schools experience when trying to fund essential programs.
I believe that all young U.S. citizens should be afforded an opportunity to be educated. I don't see education as a basic right per se, but I do see the need for educated citizens to be a compelling interest that benefits everyone in our society. However, no one needs a year book in order to learn the basic skills which fall within the purview of that compelling interest. Thus, I don't think it is appropriate to publically supplement the receipt of yearbooks for all students. If a student wants a yearbook, that student (or his or her family) should pay for it. For those students who can't afford a yearbook, they are being given the opportunity to educate themselves so that they have a fair chance to suceed in our capitalistic society, and can in turn buy a yearbook for their own children when the time comes.
TTFN,
Blackout
---
A question of love.
---
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
The only frill I really lament them missing out on is the graduation gown. The cap and gown are required to walk on graduation day, and it's expensive to rent them, so if a kid really can't afford it, that kid doesn't get to walk. I think that is hugely detrimental to low income graduates and the younger students who are in similar situations. That's the only fee I think it's worth it to subsidize. Or schools should not require gown rentals.
And in honor of graduation season, a quote from Ellen's commencement speech at Tulane:
"I can't imagine a more tenacious graduating class. Look at you all, wearing your robes. Usually, when you're wearing a robe at ten in the morning, it means you've given up."
...who doesn't walk at graduation has the same worth in the job market as a diploma of a high income graduate who does walk. I would suggest that such a subsidy would be more appropriately obtained through a private charity (and its one to which I would be willing to donate). I sympathize with your position, but I don't think it is defensible to use the police power of government to forcibly seize the assets of private citizens just to make a low income student feel better about themselves at graduation. The diploma is the reward for their hard work, not the ceremony.
TTFN,
Trey
---
A question of love.
---
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
But what about not requiring a gown to walk? Cheap solution. No one excluded from an important rite of passage and no one pays a dime.
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
I am of two minds regarding your suggestion.
On the one hand, why should sucessful families be forced to further compromise and cheapen the rewards that come naturally from sucess in a capitalist society? I mean, the low income students are already having (more or less) their entire education subsidized at the expense of more successful families. I think that people who ask for charity from the State need to be prepared to accept the absolute minimum accommodation that is necessary to satisfy the compelling interest which justifies the seizure of assests that finances a given need. To turn around after accepting a hand out and demand that your benefactors cheapen their own experience so that you don't feel like a charity case (which is what this sounds like, to me) seems ungrateful and onerous to me.
But on the other hand, it does seem like a cheap compromise that allows as many kids as want to participate in an "important right of passage." Of course, this begs the question of whether or not an "important right of passage" can remain as such if you gut the ceremony of its most basic symbolic trappings. This seems like a worthy alternative, but I feel that is a question that I think would have to be answered on a community level.
TTFN,
Blackout
---
A question of love.
---
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
I know...I was thinking about the "pomp" part of pomp and circumstance as I wrote that and realizing that without the symbolism of the caps and gowns, the ceremony has less "pomp." The thing is, as you pointed out, the diploma is the point, and the ceremony is the public celebration of the work they did to receive the diploma. I think that excluding kids from this public recognition could be detrimental to a population who already struggles to achieve such an honor. And I'm not just talking about self-esteem. I'm talking about graduation rates. I know walking across the stage is not a motivator for everyone, but for those who are motivated by the public recognition of the ceremony, pricing it out of reach encourages them to say, "what's the point?" and try less hard. I think there are enough elements of the education system that tell low income kids that education is not meant for them; if they get past all those and make it to graduation day, they should be able to walk, robed or robeless.
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
...I am forced to consider the fact that the graduation walk occurs after the work to obtain the diploma is completed, so I don't really see how walking in a cap and gown could significantly affect the ability of a given student to sucessfully graduate. I do see what you are saying about the perceived value of the public recognition, but I'm not convinced that it is appropriate to seize assets from citizens to motivate students who don't try their hardest when given a charitable opportunity to better themselves through education, just because they don't get a free "atta' boy" upon graduation. And, I don't think that citizens should be punished for being successful. This sound very much like a "feel good" provision which while commendable, does not in my opinion justify the use of the police power of the State to enforce.
TTFN,
Blackout
P.S. I'm sorry if I sound cold, but I'm feeling VERY Libertarian today.
---
A question of love.
---
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
You should feel great about giving every kid who earns a diploma the liberty of walking across the stage, whether they wear a robe or not. I'm sorry that seeing a student receive his/her diploma without a cap and gown on will diminish the enjoyment of the wealthier families who are able to afford the $130 charge, but the students who earn diplomas should be given the choice of walking across the stage to receive it and should not be told they can't because they can't afford the costume. That is a slap in the face after what the students have gone through to earn the diploma. No matter what the job market tells them, not allowing them to participate in the ceremony tells them that their diploma is less valuable than the diplomas of those who could pay for the get up.
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
So, the student who already relies on someone else to pay virtually every penny of the cost of their education gets pissed because those people aren't willing to shuck out another $130 in order for that student to attend a non-essential function. I'm sorry, but that appeal to doesn't move me. The purposes of public education isn't to make a student feel good about themselves. Its purpose is to teach basic skills to young citizens so that they can function independently as adults in our society.
Appealing to emotion doesn't change the fact that the scenario you paint requires one of two things. Either A) you have to point a gun at the more successful citizens and use the police power of the state to force them to pay for the lower income family's student's participation in a non-essential ceremony, or B) you have to punish the higher income students for the "crime" of belonging to a successful family. Neither of those options appeal to me.
A student who feels "slapped in the face" by something like this needs to grow up, and maybe think a bit about how much they have been given, already. I would suggest that the lesson that a kid in the position you describe SHOULD learn is that "hey, if I take all this education and go out and get a job and work hard then maybe my kids will get the opportunity to walk at graduation." At the risk of being crass, what you describe is like standing in the line at the soup kitchen, and then getting pissed off because the soup is free, but crackers cost a dime.
TTFN,
Blackout
---
A question of love.
---
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
It's not a slap in the face if people don't pay for their cap and gown. It is a slap in the face if, after doing the same work their classmates did, those students are told they can't walk with their classmates over something as stupid as paying to rent a gown for two hours.
And really, aside from lightly changing the aesthetic of the ceremony, how does it REALLY hurt the other students? Especially since, in most cases, the students aren't the ones covering the fee, but rather their parents? Should the graduate be penalized if their parent does not make the same income as their peers' parents?
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
It is a slap in the face if, after doing the same work their classmates did, those students are told they can't walk with their classmates over something as stupid as paying to rent a gown for two hours.
Life is full of hard hard choices. The way to get the opportunity to do fun things is to work hard, save up, and pay for them yourself. After all, SOMEONE worked hard and saved up for the money you want THEM to pay out so that someone else's kid can have fun, too.
And let's not forget...I already said that this was a commendable goal...I just disagree about the appropriate source of this charity. As I said before, I would happily donate to a private charity that wanted to make sure that every kid who graduates gets to march. But I don't think that this is an appropriate use of the politice power of the State to seize private assets.
And really, aside from lightly changing the aesthetic of the ceremony, how does it REALLY hurt the other students?
As with ALL traditions, the value is solely in the eye of the beholder. Traditions (ceremonites, rites of passage, celebrations, etc.) have very little (if any) objective value. That's why I don't consider them essential to the educational process.
Especially since, in most cases, the students aren't the ones covering the fee, but rather their parents?
This entire argument is framed on the basis of families funding extracirricular activities of the children, so that point is non-responsive. You counter-point further seems to be based on an assumption of entitlement. This is what I am contending against. It is only "punishing" the students who don't walk at graduation if you assume that those students are entitled to that experience as a fundamental right, thus justifying the use of police power to appropriate the assests of other citizens to fund it. The bottome line is that SOMEONE's parents are going to have to fit the bill (excepting of course those rare students who work to pay their own way). I'm only asking you to consider whether or not it is justified to use the police power of the State to control this tradition.
TTFN,
Blackout
---
A question of love.
---
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
Is that it costs no one anything to let them walk without a gown. That is the point I have been making for the past several comments. It doesn't hurt anyone to let them walk without the gown and it is not seizing anyone's property. If the ceremony is the expected reward at the successful end of high school, why should they be excluded? It's a simple solution.
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
Anytime the government reaches out to control the actions of a citizen, it costs something. I have already conceded that this idea has potential, but it does fundamentally alters the graduation tradition, and it does diminish the perception of value in that tradition to at least some families. Some citizens may be okay with that. Some may not. You are still faced with the same hurdle, however, of justifing the governments intrusion to force citizens to limit their opportunities because the families of some students are either not willing or not able to fund their child's participation in the event.
TTFN,
Blackout
---
A question of love.
---
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
What does the government have anything to do with a school letting kids who, for whatever reason, can't/won't get a cap and gown to still participate in the graduation ceremony?
I am treated as evil by people who claim that they are being oppressed because they are not allowed to force me to practice what they do. ~D. Dale Gulledge
This blog began as a complain against user fees in public schools. A public school is a government institution, and thus ANY action taken or policy established represents an act of the government.
TTFN,
Blackout
---
A question of love.
---
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
To turn around after accepting a hand out and demand that your benefactors cheapen their own experience so that you don't feel like a charity case (which is what this sounds like, to me) seems ungrateful and onerous to me.
What happened to "the diploma is all the really matters"? If the diploma is really all that really matters, then why does it matter if everyone just dresses up?
I mean, the low income students are already having (more or less) their entire education subsidized at the expense of more successful families.
If you want to get technical, all of the students got their education at the expense of other people, since they were not the ones that worked to fund the salaries of the faculty and staff and the maintenance of the facilities.
Non-monetarily speaking, the hard-working, low-income student put in just as much work as the hard-working, high-income student in order to earn that diploma. And in some cases, the low-income student actually put in more work, through getting a job to pay for things like clothing, than some of the high-income students who didn't work while in high school (and yes, there are many on both ends of that spectrum).
I am treated as evil by people who claim that they are being oppressed because they are not allowed to force me to practice what they do. ~D. Dale Gulledge
What happened to "the diploma is all the really matters"? If the diploma is really all that really matters, then why does it matter if everyone just dresses up?
The diploma is the only thing that matters. That's why people who want the extra ceremony are asked to pay for it themselves.
If you want to get technical, all of the students got their education at the expense of other people, since they were not the ones that worked to fund the salaries of the faculty and staff and the maintenance of the facilities.
That's true in a broad sense, but in the scenario being discussed we are talking a specific comparison between students from families of higher and lower incomes. At the risk of diverging into a discussion of "how taxes really work," the reality is that if a student's family can't afford to pay the free to attend a ceremony like graduation, then they're probably not paying as much in taxes as the family of the higher income student.
But, that's kind of beside the point. Up to the point of graduation, both the lower income student and the higher income student receive the same opportunity for education. All of the necessary elements of that education are paid for by the taxpayers. The real question is whether or not the cost of an unnecessary ceremony represents a compelling interest of the State sufficient to justify the seizure by force of the assets of other citizens. I don't think that it does.
Non-monetarily speaking, the hard-working, low-income student put in just as much work as the hard-working, high-income student in order to earn that diploma. And in some cases, the low-income student actually put in more work, through getting a job to pay for things like clothing, than some of the high-income students who didn't work while in high school (and yes, there are many on both ends of that spectrum).
This argument seems to be based on the assumption that all students are owed an equivalent home life, as well as an opportunity to educate themselves. This is not the case in a capitalist society which, of course, we are. Some kids ARE born with silver spoons in their mouth. Some kids are lucky if they even have a spoon. Public education ensures that BOTH sets of kids have the opportunity to succeed, and it provides that opportunity by pointing a gun at the silver spoon kids' families (you know, the ones who actually pay the vast majority of all taxes in this country) and saying "you have to pay for this." Even so, that money only goes so far, and its difficult to make the "compelling interest" argument for a cap and gown that will be used once and has absolutely no effect on the worth of a diploma.
TTFN,
Blackout
---
A question of love.
---
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
I agree with you and your arguments are very analytical and compelling. I read most of what you've written on this blog, particularly the discussion with ediblewoman, and you provided some valuable insight into an otherwise bland topic. What I'm saying is, because of your analytical skills, you dug much deeper and thought much more about this topic than even I would have. You laid out your case very well and it doesn't look like you left any rock unturned here. I admire your logical thorough analytical skills. Seriously.
The diploma is the only thing that matters. That's why people who want the extra ceremony are asked to pay for it themselves.
Then why is it such a big deal if a school decides that the students don't need a cap and gown to participate in graduation?
At the risk of diverging into a discussion of "how taxes really work," the reality is that if a student's family can't afford to pay the free to attend a ceremony like graduation, then they're probably not paying as much in taxes as the family of the higher income student.
If the richer family is paying more taxes, it's because they chose to live in a house that appears nice on the outside, or they chose to buy a bigger plot of land, or they chose to live in an area with a higher cost of living. If all those things were equal between the two families, then they would pay roughly the same amount in property taxes, which is what pays for public schools.
The real question is whether or not the cost of an unnecessary ceremony represents a compelling interest of the State sufficient to justify the seizure by force of the assets of other citizens.
What added cost would there be, specifically, of not requiring caps and gowns at graduation? I can't speak for other schools, but for the ones I attended, the only people that got any money from the caps and gowns were Jostens.
This argument seems to be based on the assumption that all students are owed an equivalent home life, as well as an opportunity to educate themselves.
No it doesn't. You've spent this whole time saying that poor kids didn't earn the privilege of participating in graduation because they don't make enough money, even if they actually worked harder to get through school and get to that graduation day.
Public education ensures that BOTH sets of kids have the opportunity to succeed, and it provides that opportunity by pointing a gun at the silver spoon kids' families (you know, the ones who actually pay the vast majority of all taxes in this country) and saying "you have to pay for this."
Then move somewhere with lower taxes and a lower cost of living. No one involved with funding schools are forcing anyone to stay in an area where the taxes are too high for the taxpayer to want to pay. No one in the government is stopping them from moving to a part of the city where taxes aren't as high, and no one's forcing them to vote to increase their taxes.
Property taxes are what pay for schools. Property taxes are not based on a person's income, they are based on the property. Don't want higher taxes? Find a different piece of land.
I am treated as evil by people who claim that they are being oppressed because they are not allowed to force me to practice what they do. ~D. Dale Gulledge
Then why is it such a big deal...
Remember that in the context of this blog, we are discussing the appropriateness of user fees imposed by public schools to finance non-essential services germane to the educational experience. There are limited funds to finance these kinds of activities (hence, the user fee for the cap and gowns). Since these activities are not essential, it makes sense to me to attach a user fee in order to fund them. On counter-point, it was suggested that if every student couldn't afford to participate the in ceremony, then the ceremony should be cheapened in order to put the low income student's family on even ground with the higher income student's. Success is not a crime, and we shouldn't punish people for being successful. In fact, as a capitalist society, success is something that we should encourage, not discourage.
What added cost would there be...? [T]he only people that got any money from the caps and gowns were Jostens.
LOL...good one. Any action of the government has a cost. It may be minor, but its there. Also, there is the matter of value. The scenario you suggest removes value from a ceremony in order to make it more affordable to some students.
You've spent this whole time saying that poor kids didn't earn the privilege of participating in graduation because they don't make enough money, even if they actually worked harder to get through school and get to that graduation day.
I said no such thing. I have at NO point criticized the efforts of low income students. In the context of this discussion (see above) and based on my established position that these kinds of activities are non-essential, I think it is appropriate to attach a user fee to fund them. Diminishing the cost of these activities through other means is an interesting compromise, but I simply don't like the idea of "if I can't afford something as nice as you, then you should be prevented from having nice things."
Then move somewhere with lower taxes and a lower cost of living.
Well, that's just silly (and petty, frankly). The only effect from this suggestion would be the loss of the tax revenue that funds the essential services associated with public education. Those taxes are already not funding the graduation ceremony (hence, the need for a user fee), so this doesn't help your position at all.
Property taxes are what pay for schools. Property taxes are not based on a person's income, they are based on the property.
.
Perhaps not directly, but success gives people the opportunity to own property, and it is a sure thing that SOMEONE earned the money that paid for every one of the properties that is being taxed to fund the essential services of public education.
TTFN,
Blackout
---
A question of love.
---
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
that a lot of schools run fundraisers and ask the students to do the footwork. Even in my daughter's little 2-3 year old pre-pre school class, we were asked to sell Easter candy to pay for library books. Even in her school, which is private, we are asked to shell out money all the time. I choose to have her in private school, and the tuition is very cheap compared to similar programs in our area, so I figure it balances out.
One thing I was not really aware of that kind of has me P'd off at the moment is that they ask all parents to serve as volunteers for various events. Parent Pride hours they are called. Each family is expected to serve 20 hours out of the school year. I read about it in the school handbook, but assumed it was for the K-8th grade students. Now I have to either hurry up and serve those hours in the last week of school (not likely) or pay $20/ hour for each hour missed! Ah, well, I realize the cheap tuition was a lure, and they get you on the other end. I was a full time student and working 3 jobs most of the school year, so I had zero time. What really P's me the most is we received absolutely zero reminders until mid-April. I have to ask if we can carry the balance into the next school year, since Elia is so comfortable there, we plan on keeping her there, even though we are moving.
Anyway, my point is that education comes with a price. I originally wanted to talk about fundraising, but I digressed in my iritation.
I wanted to say that schools could have fundraising programs for those kids who can't afford basic amenities like a cap and gown. It wouldn't be that hard to send kids out selling magazine subscriptions or candy so they can scrape up a hundred bucks or so for their caps and gowns. Also, graduates can donate their previously used caps and gowns and the school could sell them for a reduced price.
There are always solutions when people are creative that don't require a larger tax payer burden.
If you like this post, please tip me. All tips will be forwarded to ProgressiveU.org. Keep the site alive!
I was going to comment on that last section there of comments, but the replies to the replies were getting awfully long, so I'll comment here instead.
I've heard of places (or foundations or organizations, whatever the proper term it is) for obtaining cheap or free prom dresses and tuxs. Why not do the same for caps and gowns?
Or is the prom a more important rite of passage than graduation? Important. Hmmm, makes me wonder about priorities. Prom-a-ganda or having your family see you walk with diploma in hand?
This is where other students and faculty can really make a difference.
I didn't go to either of my school proms, got no tickets to give away to family or friends, couldn't go to the Senior Banquet, didn't get a yearbook... none of those things because I couldn't afford them. They weren't nearly as much as is being quoted here, but I was already on my own and supporting myself - or trying to - while trying to finish high school. I really wanted to attend these things and relish in the accomplishment that I had achieved. After all, it was a great accomplishment for me to have graduated with my class (considering everything I had already gone through and was going through).
When we were first told that we needed a cap and gown to attend the graduation ceremony, I thought for a moment I would cry. Of course, I tried to rationalize and tell myself that it was stupid, that it meant nothing and that it in no way took away from what I had accomplished - but I still wanted to go there. Then the announcement came that students who couldn't afford the cap and gown needed to show up at the Choir Room after school on a particular day. So I went.
A number of years before I started at this high school, the choir teacher had started a program. Her mother (an exceptional seamstress) had sewn a dozen or so caps and gowns in our school colors. They were stored in the Choir room for the year. Every year, there were a few students and a few faculty members who donated to have her make a couple more of these gowns and caps.
Obviously, you had to be careful when wearing these items... no food or drinks etc. so you could return them. But a $5 deposit on a cap and gown was much more doable for me than however much it would have cost any other way.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"when you have nothing else to say, "Fwonk" is always the perfect thing."
"yeah well, fwonk"
--Devon
Fanaile Essence
That is such an awesome program!
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
Bravo Blackout!
excellent analysis, your usual persistence, and an issue we can fully agree upon.
Had to happen sooner or later ;-)
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends upon the unreasonable man."
- George Bernard Shaw