It's a pretty good argument but with two possible flaws.
- The exact same argument could be made for getting rid of geometry. (I was made to take it. I didn't understand its purpose at the time and I still don't.) And of course some people make the same argument for algebra. And if we get down to just arithmetic, what will educrats fill the released time with? Don't answer, I don't want to know.
- More importantly, I suspect statistics as it would end up being taught would be overly mechanical. This is how you compute a t-test. These are the wonderful things you can do with a truly random sample . . . What's more needed is instruction on statistics as argument such as causality, selection effects--a powerful question students should be taught to always ask: who's in the sample? Who's not?--and other useful but undertaught topics. I'm not optimistic that the time devoted to "statistics" would be used wisely.