Should reading be a civil right?

[barfbag]

Equality can be thought of everyone having an equal right to earn their own way through life.

Does this mean you are in favor of having 100% inheritance taxes?

No it means everyone will have the freedom to earn their own way in the free market, but have safety nets as well. The inheritance tax should vary by how much one's inheritance is worth. All I want is for kids to know how to read when they graduate. That's all.

[MalaspinaGold]

barfbag, please respond to my statement.

[barfbag]

barfbag, please respond to my statement.

I thought I did. Reaching out to students before school age is something for parents to do. Not all kids have good parents and it's unfortunate, but it's up to the schools once a child starts school. If mothers stayed home instead of working, then they could help their children learn how to read before school age if your goal is for children to read by then. Beginning to learn in kindergarten is fine with me and it's when I finished learning how to read. It's not fair, but some students should be held back if they can't read by the end of third grade. Other than mothers staying home which would drive down housing prices, inflation, costs of consumer goods, and more, assistance programs such as welfare, WIC, food stamps, and Medicaid are good solutions. Do you think these programs are working?

[MalaspinaGold]

You didn't respond at all. The simple fact of the matter is that kids who don't get early exposure to books won't be proficient in reading. I'm not saying that mothers have to stay home- you're setting up a strawman. I'm saying that there should be a way to educate parents about how to parent.

If it is true that our society does not allow for parents spending time with children early on, that says something about the current work environment. In that case, something like free universal pre-k could also accomplish this goal.

The idea that school can completely make up for the faults of parenting is ludicrous. It's like trying to run a marathon and walking for the first six miles. No matter how fast you run the remaining 20, you aren't going to have anywhere near a good score.

We need to have a multi-pronged attack. One to improve schools, the other to correct bad parenting. Attempting one without the other is silly.

[barfbag]

You didn't respond at all. The simple fact of the matter is that kids who don't get early exposure to books won't be proficient in reading. I'm not saying that mothers have to stay home- you're setting up a strawman. I'm saying that there should be a way to educate parents about how to parent.

If it is true that our society does not allow for parents spending time with children early on, that says something about the current work environment. In that case, something like free universal pre-k could also accomplish this goal.

The idea that school can completely make up for the faults of parenting is ludicrous. It's like trying to run a marathon and walking for the first six miles. No matter how fast you run the remaining 20, you aren't going to have anywhere near a good score.

We need to have a multi-pronged attack. One to improve schools, the other to correct bad parenting. Attempting one without the other is silly.

A government teaching parents how to parent? I'm ok with pre-K if it's run by someone other than the federal government. States doing it would be great. As for mothers, they should stay home if it's what's best for helping their kids.

[MalaspinaGold]

Even something as simple as the government funding tv ads stressing the importance of parents reading to children would help.

Either way, if you think reading should be a universal right, you should be willing to let the federal or state government do outreach to keep that right sacred. If not, then it's not really a right.

Now, which one is more important: that the mom work to provide for the kid physically, or for the mom to stay home and provide for the kid mentally. In the current system that liberals are trying to change, then that choice would not necessarily have to be made.

[barfbag]

Even something as simple as the government funding tv ads stressing the importance of parents reading to children would help.

Either way, if you think reading should be a universal right, you should be willing to let the federal or state government do outreach to keep that right sacred. If not, then it's not really a right.

Now, which one is more important: that the mom work to provide for the kid physically, or for the mom to stay home and provide for the kid mentally. In the current system that liberals are trying to change, then that choice would not necessarily have to be made.

One thing I liked was Obama's ad talking about the importance of being a dad. I think schools should be the ones outreaching. The states would do a much better job at this than the federal government. We've already seen how they handle social security, Medicare, the DMV, and other programs. They all end up bankrupt. Working to provide for a sick child is important. I'm not going to judge a mother for working as long as their kids turn out alright. I don't like what liberals are trying to do.

[MalaspinaGold]

Sorry to be frank, but you have absolutely no clue about what liberals want to do. It just does not seem to get through.

By the way, DMV is a state-run operation. Social security is fairly well-run, and it is federal. You just disproved yourself here.

Again, schools can only reach out to SCHOOL age kids. What you are saying is ignore the first six years of a child's life, and that the school's can make up for what the kid has lost during those first formative years. It's a great racket too, especially since you can then bash evil teachers because they can't turn these kids around when society has turned it's back on them from a very early age. A great racket, unless you have some foothold in reality.

Your posts literally are a string of incoherent platitudes. You have absolutely no semblance of a reasoned argument. you have not responded to my post whatsoever. I have attempted to spoon feed this to you. If you don't get it, then there is clearly something wrong with your critical thinking skills.

[Mordecai]

Your posts literally are a string of incoherent platitudes. You have absolutely no semblance of a reasoned argument. you have not responded to my post whatsoever. I have attempted to spoon feed this to you. If you don't get it, then there is clearly something wrong with your critical thinking skills.

It might be this:

What we have are functional illiterates, they can read, but they do so at a level where they can not understand a manual or a textbook. These people are hard to discover, and most can live productive lives in specific jobs. Discovering them are relative hard and forcing them to continue in school until they "can read" are counter-productive.

[barfbag]

Sorry to be frank, but you have absolutely no clue about what liberals want to do. It just does not seem to get through.

By the way, DMV is a state-run operation. Social security is fairly well-run, and it is federal. You just disproved yourself here.

Again, schools can only reach out to SCHOOL age kids. What you are saying is ignore the first six years of a child's life, and that the school's can make up for what the kid has lost during those first formative years. It's a great racket too, especially since you can then bash evil teachers because they can't turn these kids around when society has turned it's back on them from a very early age. A great racket, unless you have some foothold in reality.

Your posts literally are a string of incoherent platitudes. You have absolutely no semblance of a reasoned argument. you have not responded to my post whatsoever. I have attempted to spoon feed this to you. If you don't get it, then there is clearly something wrong with your critical thinking skills.

Again all I want is for the underprivileged children of this country to be held to the same standards as everyone else. They're plenty capable. What's the point of going to school if you can't help a child who has had a bad start to their life?

[MalaspinaGold]

Sorry to be frank, but you have absolutely no clue about what liberals want to do. It just does not seem to get through.

By the way, DMV is a state-run operation. Social security is fairly well-run, and it is federal. You just disproved yourself here.

Again, schools can only reach out to SCHOOL age kids. What you are saying is ignore the first six years of a child's life, and that the school's can make up for what the kid has lost during those first formative years. It's a great racket too, especially since you can then bash evil teachers because they can't turn these kids around when society has turned it's back on them from a very early age. A great racket, unless you have some foothold in reality.

Your posts literally are a string of incoherent platitudes. You have absolutely no semblance of a reasoned argument. you have not responded to my post whatsoever. I have attempted to spoon feed this to you. If you don't get it, then there is clearly something wrong with your critical thinking skills.

Again all I want is for the underprivileged children of this country to be held to the same standards as everyone else. They're plenty capable. What's the point of going to school if you can't help a child who has had a bad start to their life?

That's the point of standardized tests...
Anyway, you won't solve the problem at the core until you address the underlying problem. Everything else is a band-aid. If you want to both treat the infection and put on a band aid, that's great. But not treating an infection allows it to fester.

Again, it's like running a marathon by walking the first six miles. The kid is too behind to catch up to those who ran the first six miles. Wit a great teacher, they might be able to catch up 2 miles. Either way, they are still behind.

[barfbag]

Sorry to be frank, but you have absolutely no clue about what liberals want to do. It just does not seem to get through.

By the way, DMV is a state-run operation. Social security is fairly well-run, and it is federal. You just disproved yourself here.

Again, schools can only reach out to SCHOOL age kids. What you are saying is ignore the first six years of a child's life, and that the school's can make up for what the kid has lost during those first formative years. It's a great racket too, especially since you can then bash evil teachers because they can't turn these kids around when society has turned it's back on them from a very early age. A great racket, unless you have some foothold in reality.

Your posts literally are a string of incoherent platitudes. You have absolutely no semblance of a reasoned argument. you have not responded to my post whatsoever. I have attempted to spoon feed this to you. If you don't get it, then there is clearly something wrong with your critical thinking skills.

Again all I want is for the underprivileged children of this country to be held to the same standards as everyone else. They're plenty capable. What's the point of going to school if you can't help a child who has had a bad start to their life?

That's the point of standardized tests...
Anyway, you won't solve the problem at the core until you address the underlying problem. Everything else is a band-aid. If you want to both treat the infection and put on a band aid, that's great. But not treating an infection allows it to fester.

Again, it's like running a marathon by walking the first six miles. The kid is too behind to catch up to those who ran the first six miles. Wit a great teacher, they might be able to catch up 2 miles. Either way, they are still behind.

I know exactly what you're saying. Head Start!

[MalaspinaGold]

That's part of it.