"Affordable Childcare"

[Anonymous]

"So here's the question: There are affordable apartment complexes around a mile or two away, with excellent bus service. Why do the taxpayers have to fund low-incime people living in luxury apartments "

Personally not a huge fan of the set asides either unless it is a requirement to build some type of housing on site but not necessarily the same luxury level.

BUT what this policy does is help shape slightly more diverse schools. I would be fine with much fewer set aside policies of we combined that with busing that paired hyper rich areas with lower incomes one for school zoning to ensure that poverty levels are not excessively concentrated as they are now in certain areas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:well, many european countries have actual affordable childcare. they also have reasonable maternity leave policies.

And very affordable higher education and free health care for citizens, affordable for non-citizens or tourists.
This is America, not Europe.

As mentioned before, Europeans tend to value the work of caring for babies and toddlers.

Americans tend not to value this important work at all. It shows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:well, many european countries have actual affordable childcare. they also have reasonable maternity leave policies.

And very affordable higher education and free health care for citizens, affordable for non-citizens or tourists.
This is America, not Europe.

As mentioned before, Europeans tend to value the work of caring for babies and toddlers.

Americans tend not to value this important work at all. It shows.

+1. Agreed. There are other jobs that are more respected in Europe too- like serving at restaurants. People actually make a career out of it, whereas in the US it's frowned upon if you are waiting tables once you're out of college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:well, many european countries have actual affordable childcare. they also have reasonable maternity leave policies.

And very affordable higher education and free health care for citizens, affordable for non-citizens or tourists.
This is America, not Europe.

America spends its money protecting those countries. We have little left for good things those countries can afford, because, well, we're the world police. And one doesn't become a cop to get rich or have cushy life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"So here's the question: There are affordable apartment complexes around a mile or two away, with excellent bus service. Why do the taxpayers have to fund low-incime people living in luxury apartments "

Personally not a huge fan of the set asides either unless it is a requirement to build some type of housing on site but not necessarily the same luxury level.

BUT what this policy does is help shape slightly more diverse schools. I would be fine with much fewer set aside policies of we combined that with busing that paired hyper rich areas with lower incomes one for school zoning to ensure that poverty levels are not excessively concentrated as they are now in certain areas.

You forget the other benefit of preventing the growth of ghetto's. If you were to travel more you could see cities where this has been implemented well. This wide big world has large cities where the different incomes are spread out and even mediocre priced neighborhoods are not bad places. Perhaps that does benefit the whole society more than you can comprehend, but for that you would need a bigger head

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"So here's the question: There are affordable apartment complexes around a mile or two away, with excellent bus service. Why do the taxpayers have to fund low-incime people living in luxury apartments "

Personally not a huge fan of the set asides either unless it is a requirement to build some type of housing on site but not necessarily the same luxury level.

BUT what this policy does is help shape slightly more diverse schools. I would be fine with much fewer set aside policies of we combined that with busing that paired hyper rich areas with lower incomes one for school zoning to ensure that poverty levels are not excessively concentrated as they are now in certain areas.

You forget the other benefit of preventing the growth of ghetto's. If you were to travel more you could see cities where this has been implemented well. This wide big world has large cities where the different incomes are spread out and even mediocre priced neighborhoods are not bad places. Perhaps that does benefit the whole society more than you can comprehend, but for that you would need a bigger head

Not the PP, but what do you mean about "needing a bigger head?" Are you saying that you understand the concept, but the PP (who wrote well and presented a valid concept) isn't smart enough? Nice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"So here's the question: There are affordable apartment complexes around a mile or two away, with excellent bus service. Why do the taxpayers have to fund low-incime people living in luxury apartments "

Personally not a huge fan of the set asides either unless it is a requirement to build some type of housing on site but not necessarily the same luxury level.

BUT what this policy does is help shape slightly more diverse schools. I would be fine with much fewer set aside policies of we combined that with busing that paired hyper rich areas with lower incomes one for school zoning to ensure that poverty levels are not excessively concentrated as they are now in certain areas.

You forget the other benefit of preventing the growth of ghetto's. If you were to travel more you could see cities where this has been implemented well. This wide big world has large cities where the different incomes are spread out and even mediocre priced neighborhoods are not bad places. Perhaps that does benefit the whole society more than you can comprehend, but for that you would need a bigger head

NP. Examples? Lived in many European cities, all had pretty bad areas you could call ghettos.