Mvu 25 2012-2024 Form

I believe that the answer to your question is;-  because it is no longer neccessary to be able to change your tyres yourself, or jump start your car from another.  You just make that call.Roadside assistance has become super efficient.Which is a shame really.  I think that people are becoming too complacent, and that a few mechanical skills could possibly save your life.Worse case scenario;-  it's snowing, you know it's going to be a full blizzard.  You have a flat.  The roadside assistance is already super busy, you are in a waiting queue of ten other incidences.  The snow is going to eventually be sufficiently thick, that even with a tyre change, you are going no-where.How lucky you are that you know how to change a tyre and just get out of there before it becomes impossible. Just.How lucky you are that they also taught you to have the minimal survival kit in your car just in case that you are blocked in the snow anyway.And, look at that, somebody is stalled in the snow, their car won't start because of a flat battery.  How lucky they are that you also know how to jump start a car with those leads that you carry in the spare wheel space.But roadside assistance and complacency, "it won't happen to me" has made us fools to ourselves.I have in the past, been able to help many other road users in difficult situations because my car carries the basic tools and kit for general road comfort.  If people want to rely on "services" that is of course their right, the power of their money.  But if there is an accident that could have been avoided by a little training and common sense, then I think that should be taken into consideration as being a good thing.I would have the driving license test be far more complicated than it is, and having the basic car knowledge an important part of the training.I would also have obligatory re-testing every five or ten years.Every year people are injured or die as a result of "lack of knowledge", I think the authorities have a responsability to make sure that people are tested to prove themselves capable of the minimum survival on the road basics, it's cheaper in the long run for everyone.  The road is not a play ground, and too many people think that it is others that are responsible for their general safety.It's all fun and games until you get a flat, and your phone has no battery left.Two flats.  Ooops...

Ask your local dept of motor vehicles.

Departments of education and school districts always have to make decisions about what to include in their curriculum.  There are a lot of life skills that people need that aren't taught in school.  The question is should those skills be taught in schools?I teach high school, so I'll talk about that.  The typical high school curriculum is supposed to give students a broad-based education that prepares them to be citizens in a democracy and to be able to think critically.  For a democracy to work, we need educated, discerning citizens with the ability to make good decisions based on evidence and objective thought.  In theory, people who are well informed about history, culture, science, mathematics, etc., and are capable of critical, unbiased thinking, will have the tools to participate in a democracy and make good decisions for themselves and for society at large.  In addition to that, they should be learning how to be learners, how to do effective, basic research, and collaborate with other people.  If that happens, figuring out how to do procedural tasks in real life should not provide much of a challenge.  We can't possibly teach every necessary life skill people need, but we can help students become better at knowing how to acquire the skills they need.  Should we teach them how to change a tire when they can easily consult a book or search the internet to find step by step instructions for that?  Should we teach them how to balance a check book or teach them how to think mathematically and make sense of problems so that the simple task of balancing a check book (which requires simple arithmetic and the ability to enter numbers and words in columns and rows in obvious ways) is easy for them to figure out.  If we teach them to be good at critical thinking and have some problem solving skills they will be able to apply those overarching skills to all sorts of every day tasks that shouldn't be difficult for someone with decent cognitive ability  to figure out.  It's analogous to asking why a culinary school didn't teach its students the steps and ingredients to a specific recipe.  The school taught them about more general food preparation and food science skills so that they can figure out how to make a lot of specific recipes without much trouble.  They're also able to create their own recipes.So, do we want citizens with very specific skill sets that they need to get through day to day life or do we want citizens with critical thinking, problem solving, and other overarching cognitive skills that will allow them to easily acquire ANY simple, procedural skill they may come to need at any point in their lives?

In the US, as long as you're not applying for a job which requires you to drive, it should probably be ok.  Most employers use a driver's license or State-issued ID card as a way of establishing that you're actually who you say you are. If the job does require a valid driver's license, you aren't qualified for that position yet.  The job posting may have listed minimum requirements.  But if you're working at a desk or front counter or in a restaurant (not delivering), the lack of a driver's license probably isn't a big deal.