"A Cheap, Race-Neutral Way to Close the Racial Wealth Gap..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Or we could have free quality childcare for the under 5 set. Classes with 20 kids max for everyone with reading and math support. Pretty much scaffold and I do as many community issues (if they exist) as we can and lift all those kids up and up and give them portions beyond getting pregnant at 16 etc. and yes tracking. Talented people are needed for all sorts of trades and jobs that don't need college but can lead to a successful life and independence from the govt. Teach budgeting and proper shop and intro to nursing along with college prep.

OP here. I’m a child psychiatrist. Many people in my profession have advocated for this, and I completely agree with it. If not free, then heavily subsidized. There are so many reasons this would be wonderful. However, it’s impossible to put it out there at any level without it devolving into a WOHM/SAHM debate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or we could have free quality childcare for the under 5 set. Classes with 20 kids max for everyone with reading and math support. Pretty much scaffold and I do as many community issues (if they exist) as we can and lift all those kids up and up and give them portions beyond getting pregnant at 16 etc. and yes tracking. Talented people are needed for all sorts of trades and jobs that don't need college but can lead to a successful life and independence from the govt. Teach budgeting and proper shop and intro to nursing along with college prep.

This. I'd pay $800 billion for this. But I don't want to pay $80 billion when there's no assurance the money will actually lead to better lives beyond immediate consumption.

Why do you think it would lead to immediate consumption? Examine your bias.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or we could have free quality childcare for the under 5 set. Classes with 20 kids max for everyone with reading and math support. Pretty much scaffold and I do as many community issues (if they exist) as we can and lift all those kids up and up and give them portions beyond getting pregnant at 16 etc. and yes tracking. Talented people are needed for all sorts of trades and jobs that don't need college but can lead to a successful life and independence from the govt. Teach budgeting and proper shop and intro to nursing along with college prep.

This. I'd pay $800 billion for this. But I don't want to pay $80 billion when there's no assurance the money will actually lead to better lives beyond immediate consumption.

Why do you think it would lead to immediate consumption? Examine your bias.

Maybe you should examine your ignorance.

We can look at lottery winners as a case study. And it's not particularly impressive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or we could have free quality childcare for the under 5 set. Classes with 20 kids max for everyone with reading and math support. Pretty much scaffold and I do as many community issues (if they exist) as we can and lift all those kids up and up and give them portions beyond getting pregnant at 16 etc. and yes tracking. Talented people are needed for all sorts of trades and jobs that don't need college but can lead to a successful life and independence from the govt. Teach budgeting and proper shop and intro to nursing along with college prep.

This. I'd pay $800 billion for this. But I don't want to pay $80 billion when there's no assurance the money will actually lead to better lives beyond immediate consumption.

Why do you think it would lead to immediate consumption? Examine your bias.

Maybe you should examine your ignorance.

We can look at lottery winners as a case study. And it's not particularly impressive.

PP who mentioned $800B here. I was thinking of lottery winners as I wrote that. It's not a white or black thing, either. Maybe a paternalistic thing, though.

[Anonymous]

Pentagon budget went from ~$300B to ~$600B per year under Bush II. Went up a bit under Obama (maybe $650B). Rose again to ~$750B under Trump. Not including black budget of CIA, etc. Pentagon is not auditable, hasn’t been for decades. Maybe fewer pointless, endless foreign wars? A little less corporate welfare? Budgetpriorities.org

[Anonymous]

Universal basic income. -Andrew Yang

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's crap and has been debunked - Ezra Klein and Annie Lowrey are the neoliberal shill versions of Matt and LIz Bruenig.

Source, please? I'm actually curious.

https://twitter.com/MaxGhenis/status/1277617205794926597?s=20

annie and ezra are wealthy and this colors their view time and time again instinctively compared to their millennial left wonk peers...even compared to people like Matt Yglesias.

matt and liz bruenig should be way more popular than ezra and annie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we incentivize people not to work hard and rather just to be lazy and crap out more kids they can't afford. Great.

Time and time again the research has shown that the best way to lift people out of poverty is...to give them money! There is no actual evidence to support the idea thag doing this incentives laziness and other vices. It's actually been shown that it helps tremendously. I would really suggest looking at the facts on this instead of parroting this knee-jerk reaction perpetuatinf this harmful myth.

They'd have to actually WANT to reduce the wealth gap, and a lot of people just don't really want that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lol. $50,000 for each poor baby. What could possibly go wrong?

LOL 50,000 in mortgage interest deductions in only 5 years. What could possibly go wrong?

[Anonymous]

I’m a physician and would have blown this entire account on partying in college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m a physician and would have blown this entire account on partying in college.

Ok. But how do you think your Medicaid patients would have spent it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's crap and has been debunked - Ezra Klein and Annie Lowrey are the neoliberal shill versions of Matt and LIz Bruenig.

Source, please? I'm actually curious.

https://twitter.com/MaxGhenis/status/1277617205794926597?s=20

annie and ezra are wealthy and this colors their view time and time again instinctively compared to their millennial left wonk peers...even compared to people like Matt Yglesias.

matt and liz bruenig should be way more popular than ezra and annie.

Thanks, this is interesting. The policy is to give $50K to all 18-year-olds, black and white, but to means test it by income or wealth when you're 18.

But if the goal is to converge overall mean black and white wealth over time, this sort of policy just is not going to get you anywhere close to there. Indeed, even these median young adults who have a brief convergence around the time they turn adults will themselves end up diverging again with differential incomes, differential savings, differential rates of return (especially on real estate), and differential inheritances — none of which have significantly kicked in yet at that age but which are the drivers of the continuation of the racial wealth gap.

Sounds like fixing systemic problems would be as or more important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Or we could have free quality childcare for the under 5 set. Classes with 20 kids max for everyone with reading and math support. Pretty much scaffold and I do as many community issues (if they exist) as we can and lift all those kids up and up and give them portions beyond getting pregnant at 16 etc. and yes tracking. Talented people are needed for all sorts of trades and jobs that don't need college but can lead to a successful life and independence from the govt. Teach budgeting and proper shop and intro to nursing along with college prep.

This is basically the “Nordic Model.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Republican Senator Kasich and the Clinton administration were actually looking (separately) into something like this, back in the halcyon days of 2001 when we had a budget surplus and nobody knew what to do with it. The proposal was to give every kid under a certain income $1,000, because that's what was affordable. Not sure what counts as "rich" or "poor." Compounding $1,000 for 18 years would result in a larger amount, but not $50,000. Frankly, retooling the Pell Grant and other grant programs would probably make a bigger difference for poor kids.

Kasich was never a senator

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol. $50,000 for each poor baby. What could possibly go wrong?

LOL 50,000 in mortgage interest deductions in only 5 years. What could possibly go wrong?

Well, one incentivizes a purchase of a permanent home for a family, the other incentivizes cranking out additional babies when you're poor. What am I missing?