Then out of curiosity of what you would later on want to do, you would choose to take all the classes, and eventually choose what you would want to be, and at that point learn the other necessary life skills.
I didn't quite understand this.
Are you suggesting that the system should be the following?
1. Go to school and be educated in life skills for several years (e.g, taxes, voting, law, stocks, first aid, etc...)
2. Optionally choose to take all regular subjects (maths, english, science, IT, MFL, history, geography, etc...) in order to find which ones you like and wish to follow.
3. Follow that career path.
Because that is ludicrous.
These "life-skills" that you want to learn are as incredibly varied as the subjects already taught at school. To teach all of them in ample detail would leave no room to teach current subjects, OR you'd be in education for even longer, either at the taxpayers expense or your own (and it couldn't be your own expense because you have no experience in skills to even get a job).
If you learnt life-skills entirely over regular school subjects you'd leave school knowing how to deal with money, but NOT how to earn it. Because no one will ever give you even a slightly higher-paying job if you have no knowledge of maths or english or basic science, let alone if you want to go down a career that requires a specific education, such as law, history, acting, carpentry, business, engineering or anything else.
At most there should be a life-skills or home-economics class taught at a basic level, in the same way other subjects are at school, where you can learn how to budget, vote, pay taxes, cook and clean, etc...
But not in place of any other subjects.
Because ultimately life-skills are NOT going to get you a job.
And let's be honest, you don't even have to worry about paying taxes if you can't even get yourself an income. Emplyoment is definitely the priority.