Oh The Irony! Pre-k for Refugees! (Atlanta, Decatur: how much, private schools, live)

[JPD]

Originally Posted by RoslynHolcomb

The question is not whether or not people could or should make choices. I think that's a given. The question is; Is it moral or ethical to take advantage of people who are gullible or stupid? I mean, if your neighbor places all his worldly goods out on the front lawn, he's certainly stupid, and is responsible if someone takes them, but isn't the person who takes his belongings responsible as well? Or does 'personal responsibility' only work in one direction? In my mind this is not a conversation about the responsibility of the people playing the lottery. I think we're all in agreement that playing the lottery is dumb. The question is, why are we so willing to take advantage of people's stupidity? Why is that okay?

I wouldn't say that lotto players are stupid. No more stupid than every single person who has ever gone to a casino. Just curious, have you ever approached a lotto ticket buyer and tried to explain to them that they are being taken advantage of because they are dumb, poor and gullible?

Cigarrette smokers...now there's some stupidity.

[neil0311]

Originally Posted by RoslynHolcomb

The question is; Is it moral or ethical to take advantage of people who are gullible or stupid? I mean, if your neighbor places all his worldly goods out on the front lawn, he's certainly stupid, and is responsible if someone takes them, but isn't the person who takes his belongings responsible as well? Or does 'personal responsibility' only work in one direction?

You assume that people are "gullible or stupid" because they play the lottery. I don't make that leap, although the line for me is drawn if you blow the rent money on lottery tickets and then ask me to give you money out of my pocket to make up for it.

As to your analogy, I think it's flawed. Stealing someone's property is a crime. Playing the lottery is not. Of course someone who commits a crime should be held accountable. Leaving your stuff on your lawn isn't smart, and you shouldn't be surprised when it gets stolen, but the guy committing the crime is responsible for the crime. Your logic follows the line of people who would blame women for being assaulted because of what they were wearing.

The bottom line is that playing the lottery is legal. People have a right to do it, and the odds of winning are public knowledge. If you play and lose, that's on you.

The real question is: how would you fund the Hope scholarship and pre-K in Georgia without the lottery? Would you hike up taxes on "the rich"? Would you eliminate those programs? What is your alternative?

[pinetreelover]

Originally Posted by RoslynHolcomb

The question is not whether or not people could or should make choices. I think that's a given. The question is; Is it moral or ethical to take advantage of people who are gullible or stupid? I mean, if your neighbor places all his worldly goods out on the front lawn, he's certainly stupid, and is responsible if someone takes them, but isn't the person who takes his belongings responsible as well? Or does 'personal responsibility' only work in one direction? In my mind this is not a conversation about the responsibility of the people playing the lottery. I think we're all in agreement that playing the lottery is dumb. The question is, why are we so willing to take advantage of people's stupidity? Why is that okay?

The difference between this scenario and the lottery is that a lottery is designed to spread around the stupidity so thinly that no one is really harmed. If thousands of people are spending a small percentage of their resources on lottery tickets with a very small chance of benefitting then minimal harm is done. No one loses anything significant unlike the fictional guy who is stupid enough to put his worldly possessions on his lawn. Of course there are people who overspend on lottery tickets, but I don't think that is where the majority of money is coming from.

We live in a land of freedom of choice - I consider us fortunate.

[RoslynHolcomb]

Neil, I'm not talking about whether the behavior is illegal or criminal. I'm asking about the morality of it. I would hope that even if taking your neighbor's property was perfectly legal you still wouldn't do it because it's simply wrong.

And again, this goes back to the issue of personal responsibility. There are plenty of things in the world that are wrong morally or ethically that are perfectly legal. Taking advantage of people who are gullible or stupid is, to my mind, simply wrong.

Just curious, have you ever approached a lotto ticket buyer and tried to explain to them that they are being taken advantage of because they are dumb, poor and gullible?

No I haven't. I have much more fun telling the rest of us that we are exploiting the gullible and stupid.

The real question is: how would you fund the Hope scholarship and pre-K in Georgia without the lottery? Would you hike up taxes on "the rich"? Would you eliminate those programs? What is your alternative?

Glad you asked. I've worked in social services for fifteen years, and one thing I learned in that time is despite platitudes to the contrary, Americans really don't give a flip about children or education. Don't get me wrong, we care about our own children and want to see them well-educated, but other people's kids? Not so much. Unlike most politicians, who after all can't afford to be honest, I'd start with a few truths. We have to decide whether or not we want a decent education system in this country for ALL kids. (IMO the answer is a resounding NO, but hey, maybe they'll surprise me.) Then I would tell them HONESTLY how much it costs, and that we all have to contribute our fair share.

Interestingly enough, I read an article about the Georgia pre-k back earlier in the summer. The director stated that they spend roughly $400 per month per child. Here's the thing, this area has a flourishing network of pre-schools, many of very high quality that have been around for 30+ years. The price for these (and I can only speak for Dekalb and areas close to where I live), range from a low of about $190 per month to a high of about $380 (The outlier here is the Jewish Community Center which is roughly twice that, but they seem to have an incredibly comprehensive program). Further, most of these schools, have very high teacher retention rates, a marker for a quality pre-k. (This is totally different from most of the 'private' pre-ks which have a retention rate similar to daycares). So, the burning question is, why not simply find a way to tap into this existing network? One of the first rules of any program is to not try to re-invent the wheel.

Now, some might say that they couldn't do it because most of those pre-schools are church-related, and that is true. But parents have a choice. One of Atlanta's greatest selling points is it's diversity and there seems to be a church-affiliated pre-school for every religion out there and even for those who aren't religious. Give people vouchers and send them on their merry way to choose the schools of their choice. The state isn't sponsoring religion if the parents have the freedom to choose whichever school they like.

Unlike the pre-k situation, I know very little about the HOPE scholarship and can't speak to it.

[JPD]

Originally Posted by RoslynHolcomb

No I haven't. I have much more fun telling the rest of us that we are exploiting the gullible and stupid.

Well, since you seem to be so considerate of others, it would be more fun for US to watch you have a chat with all the dumb, poor and gullible folks buying lottery tickets.

You wouldn't want to spoil our fun would you?

You pick the time and place.

[RoslynHolcomb]

Originally Posted by JPD

Well, since you seem to be so considerate of others, it would be more fun for US to watch you have a chat with all the dumb, poor and gullible folks buying lottery tickets.

You wouldn't want to spoil our fun would you?

You pick the time and place.

But see it's my CHOICE as to how I would prefer to spend my time. And surely all those of you who are in favor of CHOICE and PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY wouldn't want to deny me my CHOICE as to where I spend MY time and energy? Some people CHOOSE to play the lottery. I CHOOSE to point out that it's an unfair tax burden on the poor. Choices, choices, choices. After all, that and the exploitation of the poor is the American way.

[neil0311]

Originally Posted by RoslynHolcomb

Glad you asked. I've worked in social services for fifteen years, and one thing I learned in that time is despite platitudes to the contrary, Americans really don't give a flip about children or education. Don't get me wrong, we care about our own children and want to see them well-educated, but other people's kids? Not so much. Unlike most politicians, who after all can't afford to be honest, I'd start with a few truths. We have to decide whether or not we want a decent education system in this country for ALL kids. (IMO the answer is a resounding NO, but hey, maybe they'll surprise me.) Then I would tell them HONESTLY how much it costs, and that we all have to contribute our fair share.

You make two false assumptions, in my opinion, the first being that Americans as a whole don't care about education, and the second being that money spent is an indicator of a successful education system, and that we don't spend enough.

On the first point, I think there are some Americans who place less value on education, because it was never a priority to them, but to say generally that "Americans don't care" is a giant leap. What is your proof that backs up that bold assertion?

On the second point, it has been shown time and again, in charter schools and other non-traditional schools that money spent isn't the be all, end all. Parental involvement, curriculum, student motivation, and teacher qualification play more important roles. The US states spend on average more in absolute dollars/pupil than Japan, Germany, the UK, and many other western countries. We spend right in line with these and other developed nations in percent of GDP spent on education (~5% to 6%). Maybe it's where the money goes and not how much is spent? Where do you think we don't spend enough, how much more would you spend, and where would you get that money?

[RoslynHolcomb]

And here's the link for Atlanta Area Mommies:

AtlantaAreaMommies.com--Greater Atlanta, GA's Mom-to-Mom Connection

[LovinDecatur]

Originally Posted by neil0311

You make two false assumptions, in my opinion, the first being that Americans as a whole don't care about education, and the second being that money spent is an indicator of a successful education system, and that we don't spend enough.

On the first point, I think there are some Americans who place less value on education, because it was never a priority to them, but to say generally that "Americans don't care" is a giant leap. What is your proof that backs up that bold assertion?

On the second point, it has been shown time and again, in charter schools and other non-traditional schools that money spent isn't the be all, end all. Parental involvement, curriculum, student motivation, and teacher qualification play more important roles. The US states spend on average more in absolute dollars/pupil than Japan, Germany, the UK, and many other western countries. We spend right in line with these and other developed nations in percent of GDP spent on education (~5% to 6%). Maybe it's where the money goes and not how much is spent? Where do you think we don't spend enough, how much more would you spend, and where would you get that money?

As proven by the fact that per student expenditures in the City of Atlanta and DeKalb Co school systems both exceed that of any private school in the area.

[JPD]

Originally Posted by RoslynHolcomb

But see it's my CHOICE as to how I would prefer to spend my time. And surely all those of you who are in favor of CHOICE and PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY wouldn't want to deny me my CHOICE as to where I spend MY time and energy? Some people CHOOSE to play the lottery. I CHOOSE to point out that it's an unfair tax burden on the poor. Choices, choices, choices. After all, that and the exploitation of the poor is the American way.

I think you're missing my point. I don't really care what people do with their money. What I find objectionable is you equating poverty with stupidity and gullibility.