Sanne, I don’t know what assumptions you’re making for investment rates of return in high school, but assuming a risk averse profile designed to preserve capital and offset inflation, you’re proposing that a child work 20 hours per week starting at age 12 (almost 3 hours per day, on average).
I don’t intend any disrespect with this comment, but if a child is in a traditional school for ~7 hours per day, is working 3 hours per day, has 1-2 hours of homework, needs an hour a day of exercise to remain healthy (potentially overlaps with school/transit), needs to perform basic self care, and likely has chores at home (meal preparation and cleaning), that’s at least 13 hours a day taken up with necessary activities. At that age, children need 9-10 hours of sleep. Already, we’re at 22-23 hours of the day assigned.
With a maximum of 1-2 hours left, when is the child expected to develop friendships, build extra-curricular skills, interact with family, develop outside interests, or just relax? In particular, given that low income students are likely unable to participate in activities not offered outside the public school umbrella due to affordability, and that they will face barriers to access of programs due to a higher likelihood of parental low income, lack of access to efficient transit, absent parents due to more likely reliance on part-time shift work, I find it difficult to believe that these students will have much recourse to extra curriculars.
I also have difficulty understanding how living at home and not dating due to affordability during university years, and spending most free time working, is at all supportive of developing the EQ component of adult training. Forestalling social development and relationships because there is no time for it seems a very expensive trade-off in terms of long-term adult development, even after considering the cost of carrying some debt. I also question whether most students have the requisite executive function skills at the ages you’ve laid out to even implement this plan. You are scaffolding development of these skills with your son; I would posit that the majority of low income parents will not (either due to time or ability constraints).
There is also the question of mental health, and whether the habits you suggest inculcating (and the extent to which they are practiced) are consistent with good mental health and life satisfaction in the long run, and could prove more professionally and personally costly than a middle-way approach that trades off some debt for early years leisure.
I will also suggest that your embedded assumptions presume a more intellectually capable student than is reasonable for general application. The average university bound student is not PG, and will require more time on task to master the material in high school and post-secondary studies, and potentially not be able to save money on acceleration.
I will also point out that, in your brother’s case, it sounds like he had access to a home paid for by his fiancé. So he was actually consuming far more than you’re portraying; the cost was just shifted onto her. The assumption of housing stability—and for free—is out of the question for a lot of students.
