Article: Why Can't Allyson Get Ahead?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, the student loans to get the useless associates' degree was the first of many poor decisions. The "No Child Left Behind" law made people like Allyson think that a degree, any degree, in any subject, would be enough to create and maintain a stable economic existence. We would be better off, as a country, if we would bring back a lot more vocational ed and offer a lot more direction and incentive in the community college sphere towards steering the Allysons (and her male counterparts) into more skilled trades. There is a huge dearth of young people who know how to be electricians, plumbers, medical technicians, mechanics---the last 25 years of educational policy have made people think they are somehow "less than" the college educated if they pursue those fields. But no one is outsourcing those jobs to India or the Philippines. And unskilled immigrants can't easily acquire those jobs because they don't have the language skills to obtain the necessary training.

It works in Germany because white collars pros - docs and lawyers don’t have the same salary premium as basic tradesman.
The college premium is lower.

I agree with your sentiment, but ONLY in conjunction with a much stronger wealth redistribution system.

Otherwise you won’t get buy in as a whole from society.

[Anonymous]

So many problems could be avoided if people simply waited until they were married to have sex.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many problems could be avoided if people simply waited until they were married to have sex.

That causes a lot of other problems. Getting married because you want to have sex is a really weak foundation for a marriage. Young marriage also has pretty poor divorce rates and is not in line with most other life factors that contribute to a successful middle class existence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many problems could be avoided if people simply waited until they were married to have sex.

So, the plan is to outlaw premarital sex?

That ought to go well

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've been out of high school for almost 25 years, but the kids that took multiple AP classes did not go on to achieve worthless two-year degrees. Something does not add up.

I had the same thought. I wonder if she got sucked into one of those for-profit universities, which are notorious for preying on low income people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many problems could be avoided if people simply waited until they were married to have sex.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been out of high school for almost 25 years, but the kids that took multiple AP classes did not go on to achieve worthless two-year degrees. Something does not add up.

I had the same thought. I wonder if she got sucked into one of those for-profit universities, which are notorious for preying on low income people.

Sounds like you didn’t know any poor people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been out of high school for almost 25 years, but the kids that took multiple AP classes did not go on to achieve worthless two-year degrees. Something does not add up.

I had the same thought. I wonder if she got sucked into one of those for-profit universities, which are notorious for preying on low income people.

Sounds like you didn’t know any poor people.

I know plenty of poor people, including in my own family. What are you talking about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good, I see we’re kicking someone already down.

It’s the American way. F*ck you for being poor! The shocking lack of empathy is staggering.

I also find it ironic she named her child Atlas.

I guess you haven't spent much time in Asia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
How is that messed up? It wasn’t a requirement in order to qualify, it was an offer to pay for it.

Subsidies for rent - necessary.
Subsidies for food - necessary.
Subsidies for birth control - racist.

Nice logic.

The states you are referring to weren't offering Norplan for free, as an option. They were requiring it, in order for women to receive benefits, or coercing them by offering extra money for them to take it. That crossed the line. Simply offering it for free, no copay, would not be a problem. It's a great idea.

From the ACLU website:

In 1991, 1992, and 1993, legislators in more than a dozen states introduced measures that, had they passed, would have coerced women to use Norplant. Some of these bills would have offered financial incentives to women on welfare to induce them to use Norplant. Other legislation would have required women receiving public assistance either to use Norplant or lose their benefits. Some bills would have forced women convicted of child abuse or drug use during pregnancy to have Norplant implanted.

https://www.aclu.org/other/norplant-new-contraceptive-potential-abuse

[Anonymous]

So free is ok, but paying you to take it is racist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've been out of high school for almost 25 years, but the kids that took multiple AP classes did not go on to achieve worthless two-year degrees. Something does not add up.

There was a big push in schools to get more kids to take AP classes. When I was in high school AP classes were only for highly motivated kids who were planning to go to 4 year colleges. But since I left school, the schools started encouraging everyone to take AP classes.

Also, this girl didn't have a lot of parental support financially towards college. She was working her way I presume through community college or a state college in Ohio, then transferred to University of Central Florida -- online classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So free is ok, but paying you to take it is racist?

Free birth control for all who want it is fine.

Paying someone an incentive to be on birth control is a type of coercion. We don't need to be doing that.

Honestly, if the offer of free birth control with a cash incentive for all who wanted it were made available across the country just as a matter of course? I'd be OK with that. As long as it was available to everyone regardless of race I wouldn't think it was racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So free is ok, but paying you to take it is racist?

Free birth control for all who want it is fine.

Paying someone an incentive to be on birth control is a type of coercion. We don't need to be doing that.

Honestly, if the offer of free birth control with a cash incentive for all who wanted it were made available across the country just as a matter of course? I'd be OK with that. As long as it was available to everyone regardless of race I wouldn't think it was racist.

It was available to those receiving public assistance, not just certain races receiving assistance, but see how people keep twisting it?

The only qualification was those receiving assistance, so it was available to everyone regardless of race, that met that qualification.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So free is ok, but paying you to take it is racist?

Free birth control for all who want it is fine.

Paying someone an incentive to be on birth control is a type of coercion. We don't need to be doing that.

Honestly, if the offer of free birth control with a cash incentive for all who wanted it were made available across the country just as a matter of course? I'd be OK with that. As long as it was available to everyone regardless of race I wouldn't think it was racist.

It was available to those receiving public assistance, not just certain races receiving assistance, but see how people keep twisting it?

The only qualification was those receiving assistance, so it was available to everyone regardless of race, that met that qualification.

Making the birth control available and free to people receiving public assistance would not be a problem.

Making the birth control mandatory for those on assistance, or even providing financial inducements get the birth control to people on public assistance is the problem. It is a problem, even if the requirement is made of all races. Even if the inducements are offered to all races. Why? Because it is coercive.

It smacks of past history where members of the "feeble" races were sterilized. And minorities in the US are more heavily represented on public assistance, than whites, so the policy is more likely to keep minorities from reproducing than whites.

That's why people say it is racist. Even if it isn't directed at a certain race, it has an effect on some races more than others.

The answer is easy -- don't require the birth control and don't provide financial inducements for taking it. Just make birth control easy to access, and free. Provide birth control free of charge through Medicaid, Medicare and the ACA. And hey, BTW, teach sex ed and birth control in high school and make birth control available there (for free) as well. Provide funding for Planned Parenthood too!

You don't need to force women on food stamps or TANF or WIC to be injected with Norplant to get their benefits. Just make birth control easy to get anf free, and educate teen girls on how to use contraception. None of that is racist.