Poverty in this country has become stuck in a positive feedback loop, some of this is a factor of the culture of some of the lower socioeconomic population and that is unfortunate. It is all well and good to say that it starts at home and we need parents to buy into their child's education, it is hard to sell that to some single mother that has to work 80 hours a week at some minimum wage job to just put food on the table. Now, yes that single mother made some choices that landed her in the position and yes she probably suffered from a lack of environmental factors as a child that would have given her some easier opportunities to excel.

Now as a liberal, I don't want to just hand money to poor people and you are just being a ignorant conservative ideologue if that is all you think a liberal philosophy wants to do, this is of course in a vacuum not in what our worthless politicians might put into practices. I want our Federal/State governments to be investing in programs that would create breaks in the positive feedback loop the encourages poverty, in the absence of a solid family life sponsor after school programs that would promote education etc... Just because one generation is lost does not mean we should pack up and give up on the children of that generation. This is all a rather simplistic take on a much more complicated situation of course but it paints the picture well enough.

Also community outreach should most often be done at a local level, as it is more effective when you are given a helping hand by a peer then by some government official.

Firstly, education can begin anywhere in a person's life, as the Harlem children's zone does for its community. It educates poor parents on things which they need to do for a child to reach its full potential, by providing non-monetary resources (mainly awareness on the various dimensions they are when raising a child). In doing so, "breaks this cycle", due to yours truly, tax payer dollars. And its been shown for every dollar you put into education, you get 10 dollars back, so I have to say, not a bad investment.

Harlem children's zone also provide teachers who actually "teach". This has a deathly combination: "87% of our students go to college (more than twice the national average for low income students)"-http://kippnyc.org/about

I mean, wtf is that, thats crazy most experts say; but they showed it achievable and if it is, well the rest of us can do it.

Also:
Most parents in the first place, don't really sit down and go through what their kids are learning. It really is our social institutions that make the difference and there is plenty of data to show this.

Watch "Waiting for Superman", it strays away from idealogical arguments everyone makes about education and actually uses data to show what is wrong with our education system. Its the bad teachers, which are impossible to fire, because of unions current stance on teacher firings. In fact, if we fired the bad teachers, and kept average teacher and above, we would be 1st in education in the world right now.

In the end its gonna take a community to demand for there right for a good education, not the government; the government never does anything of GREAT stature, it has always been the people.

I fucktardely agree with you Sam.

I don't understand why I was attacked, I made no assertions whatsoever.

My objection to this is as such: how can America, a nation afforded every opportunity, fortune, and even sanctuary from the greatest catastrophes of the 20th century be in such bad shape?

Something is amiss. I wish I could blame Obama, but this data is only a snapshot of a trend that began in the 80s. I don't know why it started in the 80s but maybe someone smarter than me could tell us.

Also I agree 100% with skrum on crony capitalism. That's absolutely the problem.

"Now as a liberal, I don't want to just hand money to poor people and you are just being a ignorant conservative ideologue if that is all you think a liberal philosophy wants to do, this is of course in a vacuum not in what our worthless politicians might put into practices. "

I'm not knocking your particular ideology, but most "handout" programs are put into place with broad strokes, not precise controls. That's my "conservative ideologue" on the issue.

"Most parents in the first place, don't really sit down and go through what their kids are learning. It really is our social institutions that make the difference and there is plenty of data to show this."

There probably isn't statistical data to refute or support my position, but I'd bet the parents that do spend time with their kids and remain active in their school career have far greater success than those that do not, regardless of their social institutions available to them.

"Its the bad teachers, which are impossible to fire, because of unions current stance on teacher firings. In fact, if we fired the bad teachers, and kept average teacher and above, we would be 1st in education in the world right now."

You and I agree for a change! Teachers not being held accountable for their work is a complete meltdown of our educational system. Fuck unions...

Boner Oiler wrote
at 1:26 PM, Monday April 25, 2011 CDT

"I don't know"



You feeling OK bro? I've never heard you say this.

Oh please, Veta. The only person who attacked you was TBY, and you know perfectly well that's just in his nature. :)

Also: I'm of the belief that having a good stay at home parent during early childhood development (pretty much birth until kindergarten) puts that child at a huge advantage, intellectually. I think this extends into elementary education, as Thrax said- Parents that are more involved help their children be successful. It's notable that this is often impossible among those impoverished, since either both parents work to make ends meet or because it is a single parent family. That being said, I think that aid to the poor in this country is run extremely poorly, with no incentive to improve one's own situation.