Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't propose "funding" it. There is no "solution" in the sense money and or government will matter. You can spend a million dollars on each kid and it will not make a whit of difference if the kid doesn't care and doesn't want to learn. Trace that --often -- to parents who usually talk the big stuff...but never even took the time to teach them their ABC's....
The fund starts with the parents of the child. Not money, but time and love and effort. If that basic training is lacking? Then no amount of money spent from a bureacracy will make a difference.
But back to square one? Nothing in this world can correct a parent failing their own kids. We are paying the price (pun intended) for a spending money and rewarding irresponsible behavior and life-styles. Just take a walk thru a Section 8 Housing complex sometime and the blinders will fall from ones eyes pretty quickly...
Typical right wing response. Lots of views but no solutions. So parents aren't being parents is the problem but you don't have a solution to this. So do you propose just letting the situation deteriorate and complaining even more but still doing nothing about it?
Typical right wing response. Lots of views but no solutions. So parents aren't being parents is the problem but you don't have a solution to this. So do you propose just letting the situation deteriorate and complaining even more but still doing nothing about it?
Typical left-wing reply. (see, two can play that silly game! ). It's because we are not spending more money...
The situation has been "deteriorating" for years. The "solution" is not found in more of what you seem to advocate...which is more money and more government.
The "solution" is going to be found in something that, apparently, has been long forgotten. Or is too scary for many "parent" to face. That is, taking ultimate responsibility for the welfare and well-being of your own kids.
And hey? Some parents choose to home-school their own kids as a "solution." But you seem to disdain it.
Typical left-wing reply. (see, two can play that silly game! ). It's because we are not spending more money...
The situation has been "deteriorating" for years. The "solution" is not found in more of what you seem to advocate...which is more money and more government.
The "solution" is going to be found in something that, apparently, has been long forgotten. Or is too scary for many "parent" to face. That is, taking ultimate responsibility for the welfare and well-being of your own kids.
And hey? Some parents choose to home-school their own kids as a "solution." But you seem to disdain it.
You don't seem to understand.
How do you get parents to take the responsibility they are lacking? People just won't do that on their own if they are not already. There's something that has changed in society, and we're not going back to the 1950's, regardless of how much you hope.
So you still haven't answered my question. I'll ask it again. How will you get the people to change their viewpoint and take more responsibility?
Huh? There are an estimated 337,000 homeless children in Texas and we rank last in services to help them. You think I should know the names of these children in order to be concerned?
Where do these estimates come from? What is your definition of "homeless"? Does it mean they are living on the streets? For that matter, what is the definition of "children"?
As concerns the latter, I ask that because sometime back, the anti-gun people ran a series of "PSA" that concluded with a dramatic "25 (or whatever) Children a Day are Killed by Handguns" As it was? The definition of "child" was anyone under 25. And even then, most was gang-related and such. NOT, as the BS was attempting to propogandize, innocent toddlers getting hold of daddy's gun, or being murdered.
So, I am sorry (well, not really! ) if I am a little skeptical of all this. So answer the question, please.
And no, I don't think you have to know the actual names of each "homeless" or "starving" child to be concerned. What I take umbrage over is the seeming insinuation that others are not just as concerned simply because we might take a different approach and vision. But yeah, come to think of it, when you start to lay out that holier than thou concern about hunger and starving kids, you oughta know their names so something can be done about it. Not abstract, but concrete. I made an offer to do the latter.
Quote:
I don't know what type of home you have in mind, but the current system is clearly not working.
A home. With parents. What, again, are you talking about when you say homeless. See above.
Quote:
As to starving children, I wasn't really thinking of how many of them have died. I was referring to estimates that Texas ranks somewhere between 3rd and 5th in numbers of hungry children. They don't literally have to starve to death for us to consider hunger a problem, right?
No, to answer your question. I don't see it as a problem. At least until you explain in better detail exactly what are the sources for this "hunger problem" and what is the criteria for being "hungry"?
Kinda ironic, don't you think, that while "hunger" is a problem, that child obecity -- especially among poor and working class families in Texas/South, especially -- is ALSO supposed to be a problem?
Quote:
I'm sorry you lost your grandson.
Thank you...and I mean that sincerely. Just to add, I did not bring that tragedy up to garner sympathy or anything. We all have to deal with things like this. No, it was only to make the point related to another post about just why I DO feel very passionately about abused kids.
Quote:
I am not sure how abused children can be properly protected without government intervention. The educational system and the police are part of our government. What do you mean about the dangers of collectivism? Are you proposing we eliminate public schools and police departments?
C'mon. That is a ludicrous stretch. Some degree of government is inevitable and even desirable. A criminal justice system for instance. Things that the average citizen cannot be expected to do individually...especially in large urban areas.
The public schools? Ok, I have no problem with a public school system (hell, especially in that it keeps a roof over my head! LOL) if that is what people want. BUT...I want the option of home-schooling to be there. And further, that we need to return to more local control, neighborhood schools, etc.
The dangers of collectivism ought to be obvious by now. Collectivism is fine so long as it is voluntary and organic. But government controlled? It becomes dangerous and even destructive.
I understand one of your "solutions" was home schooling, and I presented some issues, like not being able to participate in school athletics as only registered students can do so.
Also, for single parents and the like, home schooling won't work.
So my question still stands. If the problem is a so called lack of parenting caused by parents not showing an interest in their children, then how do you get them to have more of an interest. Saying they need to show an interest will not cause them to show an interest. How do you motivate them to show an interest?
How do you get parents to take the responsibility they are lacking? People just won't do that on their own if they are not already. There's something that has changed in society, and we're not going back to the 1950's, regardless of how much you hope.
So you still haven't answered my question. I'll ask it again. How will you get the people to change their viewpoint and take more responsibility?
Actually, I understand perfectly. It is you that does not understand.
I am not avoiding your question. I have answered it, but I don't think you see the forest for the trees.
I CAN'T get parents to take responsibility. Neither can anyone else. But to expect that government can take up that slack is a pipe dream. You seem to be advancing a "solution" which, in essence, is the root of the problem to begin with.
That is, the expectation that money and government would solve the said problem. It won't. And it can only get worse if this line of reasoning prevails.
Thank you for your explanation. It's clear that one of us is delusional. God will judge which one.
We homeschooled our children to keep them from being taught secular humanist atheistic values like yours.
Just reaffirms my original point. People home school not to educate their children, but to shield them from being exposed to views or people that don't conform to what they believe. Then, when their child is in college, they blame society for being so liberal when they had not prepared their child for any aspect of living in the real world.
My question to you is what will you do when your child is in college and his/her roommate/best friend/lab partner/whatever is a liberal atheist. When that person will have points that your child has never heard before and your child may actually agree with them because you're not there to "protect" them? At least if you had your child in public school and these questions were raised when your child was younger, you could guide your child better or state your viewpoints. But by that time, you won't be able to intervene.
Actually, I understand perfectly. It is you that does not understand.
I am not avoiding your question. I have answered it, but I don't think you see the forest for the trees.
I CAN'T get parents to take responsibility. Neither can anyone else. But to expect that government can take up that slack is a pipe dream. You seem to be advancing a "solution" which, in essence, is the root of the problem to begin with.
That is, the expectation that money and government would solve the said problem. It won't. And it can only get worse if this line of reasoning prevails.
Okay, so your solution is to do nothing, watch the situation deteriorate further and complain further about "the good ole days" then?
In other words, you have no solution. Either that, or you have indeed avoided my question. I have nothing more to say to you at this time unless you answer my question *with a concrete solution*.
I understand one of your "solutions" was home schooling, and I presented some issues, like not being able to participate in school athletics as only registered students can do so.
No, it was not a "solution"...but an option for parent(s) who might choose to do so.
True a home-schooled kid cannot participate in public school athletics. That is just a trade-off, I suppose. We all have to make them in everyday life. However, any home-school kid still has plenty of options in terms of playing sports, if they want.
Quote:
Also, for single parents and the like, home schooling won't work.
Maybe, maybe not. Like I said, it is an option...and just what it means.
Quote:
So my question still stands. If the problem is a so called lack of parenting caused by parents not showing an interest in their children, then how do you get them to have more of an interest. Saying they need to show an interest will not cause them to show an interest. How do you motivate them to show an interest?
As said earlier, there is no answer to that question. As a teacher, all I can do is try and motivate and care and guide and, yes, love, as best I can. I once had a high school kid (tough gansta type) almost cry on my shoulder because no one at his "home" remembered his birthday. I went and bought him a little birthday cake during my lunch break...
But regardless, ultimately, it rests upon the parent. If we ever lose sight of that fact -- which apparently we have over the decades -- then turn out the lights cos there is literally nothing else that can be done.
Okay, so your solution is to do nothing, watch the situation deteriorate further and complain further about "the good ole days" then?
In other words, you have no solution. Either that, or you have indeed avoided my question. I have nothing more to say to you at this time unless you answer my question *with a concrete solution*.
Goodgawdamighty!
No, I have NO solution. How many times do I have to say it? Do YOU? If so, you are cheating the rest of society out of some sort of special insight and wisdom, by not revealing it.
All I know is that more money and more government bureauacracy sure as hell isn't.
But ok...have it your way. I would say this whole discussion can be called an impasse...or Mexican Standoff! LOL
Last edited by TexasReb; 01-30-2011 at 12:58 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
). It's because we are not spending more money...
