4 ms·

Even if you are age eligible, the "qualifications": > You may NOT be eligible for Job Corps if you: > - Use drugs illegally under federal law > - Exhibit beh

by sramam 3y ago

Even if you are age eligible, the "qualifications": > You may NOT be eligible for Job Corps if you: > - Use drugs illegally under federal law > - Exhibit behavioral problems that could prevent you or others from success in Job Corps > - Have certain criminal convictions or require court supervision If you have done any of these before 24, chances are really high that you were otherwise disadvantaged in life. And it's not going to get much easier.

l33t7332273 3y ago
I don’t think using drugs under age 24 generally means there is a really high chance that you were disadvantaged in life
- sramam 3y ago
  That's a good point. In a general sense, I agree with you. I made the comment in the context of: If you need a program like this between 16-24 AND you are doing drugs, it's much more likely than not that disadvantages have been heaped upon your life.
iancmceachern 3y ago
By your math half of all people are disadvantaged. Half of all teens report using drugs at least once. https://www.caron.org/addiction-101/teens-young-adults/statistics-and-demographics https://www.caron.org/addiction-101/teens-young-adults/stati...
- thayne 3y ago
  There is a difference between "has used a drug at some point in your life" and "are actively using drugs".
  - iancmceachern 3y ago
    The phrase "are actively using drugs" does not appear in your parent comment. I agree there is a difference between those 2 statements. But you never made the quoted statement.
    - thayne 3y ago
      I paraphrased. To use the exact quotes: There is a difference between having used drugs "at least once" and "use drugs illegaly" (note the present tense).
      - iancmceachern 3y ago
        Correct, and that difference is meaningless and applies to a large swath of the general population, which you are quickly and callously dismissing as less than you.
        thayne 3y ago
        > that difference is meaningless How so? If you tried drugs once years ago you meet this requirement for this program. If you are an addict taking drugs daily, you will probably fail the drug tests that I assume they use for this qualification and won't qualify. Of course there is a whole spectrum between thos, but saying half the population has taken drugs at least once is very much not the same thing as saying half the population is regularly using drug. And the qualification is worse for people who are heavily dependent on drugs, and thus can't easily give it up while going through the program. > which you are quickly and callously dismissing as less than you When did I ever suggest they are less than me? I was simply pointing out that saying that half of teens have tried drugs does not imply that half of them would be ineligible for this program due to drug use. In fact the same cited article states 1 in 8 have used drugs in the last year, which is probably closer to an upper bound on who would be disqualified for Job Corps due to drug use. To be clear, I am opposed to this requirement, because it is a barrier to people who need it most.

by sramam 3y ago

l33t7332273 3y ago

I don’t think using drugs under age 24 generally means there is a really high chance that you were disadvantaged in life

sramam 3y ago
That's a good point. In a general sense, I agree with you. I made the comment in the context of: If you need a program like this between 16-24 AND you are doing drugs, it's much more likely than not that disadvantages have been heaped upon your life.

iancmceachern 3y ago

By your math half of all people are disadvantaged. Half of all teens report using drugs at least once. https://www.caron.org/addiction-101/teens-young-adults/statistics-and-demographics https://www.caron.org/addiction-101/teens-young-adults/stati...

thayne 3y ago
There is a difference between "has used a drug at some point in your life" and "are actively using drugs".
- iancmceachern 3y ago
  The phrase "are actively using drugs" does not appear in your parent comment. I agree there is a difference between those 2 statements. But you never made the quoted statement.
  - thayne 3y ago
    I paraphrased. To use the exact quotes: There is a difference between having used drugs "at least once" and "use drugs illegaly" (note the present tense).
    - iancmceachern 3y ago
      Correct, and that difference is meaningless and applies to a large swath of the general population, which you are quickly and callously dismissing as less than you.
      - thayne 3y ago
        > that difference is meaningless How so? If you tried drugs once years ago you meet this requirement for this program. If you are an addict taking drugs daily, you will probably fail the drug tests that I assume they use for this qualification and won't qualify. Of course there is a whole spectrum between thos, but saying half the population has taken drugs at least once is very much not the same thing as saying half the population is regularly using drug. And the qualification is worse for people who are heavily dependent on drugs, and thus can't easily give it up while going through the program. > which you are quickly and callously dismissing as less than you When did I ever suggest they are less than me? I was simply pointing out that saying that half of teens have tried drugs does not imply that half of them would be ineligible for this program due to drug use. In fact the same cited article states 1 in 8 have used drugs in the last year, which is probably closer to an upper bound on who would be disqualified for Job Corps due to drug use. To be clear, I am opposed to this requirement, because it is a barrier to people who need it most.