quote:

Originally posted by Inconspicuous you also have to consider that more people might decide to have more children if not faced with the decision of either taking care of them or paying for someone to take care of them.

There has been many programs state wide, and nation wide (Headstart for example) and there has not been any consistent relationship between the creation of the programs and higher birth rates. Mind you there is info for headstart that dates 40 years back, and there has been no relationship.

___________________
Poetry>Byron//Blog>TheMean

quote:

Orbax At that point you kind of crossed the rubicon and you might as well lay siege to Rome

quote:

Originally posted by venomX There has been many programs state wide, and nation wide (Headstart for example) and there has not been any consistent relationship between the creation of the programs and higher birth rates. Mind you there is info for headstart that dates 40 years back, and there has been no relationship.

That may be the case, but logically, it is still a possibility.

___________________

> S u s h i p u n k . P h o t o g r a p h y <

at the very least, it's a point to make and then refute. I'm just playing devil's advocate here.

___________________

> S u s h i p u n k . P h o t o g r a p h y <

quote:

Originally posted by Inconspicuous That may be the case, but logically, it is still a possibility.

True but stepping out of your house everyday is a risk, yet you don't stay in your house to avoid possible risks. I believe that the possibility of slight increase in population due to the implementation of a program like this (which is very unlikely) is not reason enough to not implement a program of this nature. The benefits still outweigh the possibility of a slight population increase.

___________________
Poetry>Byron//Blog>TheMean

quote:

Orbax At that point you kind of crossed the rubicon and you might as well lay siege to Rome

quote:

Originally posted by venomX That is a valid point weiner, but what to do with mothers that don't have enough resources to stay at home? How do you propose to solve their situation?

i don't propose to solve their situation at all... you wanted an argument and i gave you one from my personal perspective.. i'm not suggesting that this is the way things SHOULD BE but what i mentioned is what would be in my best interest.

quote:

Originally posted by venomX True but stepping out of your house everyday is a risk, yet you don't stay in your house to avoid possible risks. I believe that the possibility of slight increase in population due to the implementation of a program like this (which is very unlikely) is not reason enough to not implement a program of this nature. The benefits still outweigh the possibility of a slight population increase.

Well, the issue would not be a major population increase. It would be an issue of a population increase within those demographic groups which would make use of such a program. While that may not represent a huge part of the population, and, thus, not represent major population increase on the whole, it might be a significant change within that group, increasing the cost of a program at a faster rate than expected.

___________________

> S u s h i p u n k . P h o t o g r a p h y <

quote:

Originally posted by wienerschnitzel i don't propose to solve their situation at all... you wanted an argument and i gave you one from my personal perspective.. i'm not suggesting that this is the way things SHOULD BE but what i mentioned is what would be in my best interest.

So basically your saying it's not your problem so you don't care for it? Even if poorer people could stay at home and raise their child, positive outcomes for this type of care are directly correlated with the parent's educational level. This would mean that for people near or under the line of poverty it would actually be better that the children attend a decent quality care center than being raise by their parents. It's sad that you would leave those people be just because it is not your problem. Oh well.

___________________
Poetry>Byron//Blog>TheMean

quote:

Orbax At that point you kind of crossed the rubicon and you might as well lay siege to Rome

quote:

Originally posted by venomX So basically your saying it's not your problem so you don't care for it? Even if poorer people could stay at home and raise their child, positive outcomes for this type of care are directly correlated with the parent's educational level. This would mean that for people near or under the line of poverty it would actually be better that the children attend a decent quality care center than being raise by their parents. It's sad that you would leave those people be just because it is not your problem. Oh well.

You asked for arguments for the other side. She gave you an argument for the other side.

___________________

> S u s h i p u n k . P h o t o g r a p h y <

quote:

Originally posted by Inconspicuous Well, the issue would not be a major population increase. It would be an issue of a population increase within those demographic groups which would make use of such a program. While that may not represent a huge part of the population, and, thus, not represent major population increase on the whole, it might be a significant change within that group, increasing the cost of a program at a faster rate than expected.

True. But then one has also to consider the poverty cycle breaking effect of a program like this. People that are subjected to good early education are more likely to get more education, be less involved in criminal activity and have higher incomes. All these are correlated with better life prospects. High education of parents is directly correlated with better outcomes for kids, etc... You can notice that even if there is an increase in that particular demographic there is also a decrease going on due to children of parents that benefited from early interventions being less prone to need to participate in public day care because they would have more options available to them.

___________________
Poetry>Byron//Blog>TheMean

quote:

Orbax At that point you kind of crossed the rubicon and you might as well lay siege to Rome

quote:

Originally posted by Inconspicuous You asked for arguments for the other side. She gave you an argument for the other side.

Didn't know it was just for the sake of argument. Nevermind my comment then.

___________________
Poetry>Byron//Blog>TheMean

quote:

Orbax At that point you kind of crossed the rubicon and you might as well lay siege to Rome

quote:

Originally posted by venomX So basically your saying it's not your problem so you don't care for it? Even if poorer people could stay at home and raise their child, positive outcomes for this type of care are directly correlated with the parent's educational level. This would mean that for people near or under the line of poverty it would actually be better that the children attend a decent quality care center than being raise by their parents. It's sad that you would leave those people be just because it is not your problem. Oh well.

WTF like inconspicuous said, it was for an argument for the other side. I resent you suggesting i don't care about people near or below the line of poverty, i don't believe i know you. It sounds like this subject is a little personal for you so if that is the case, maybe you should step aside, look at both arguments and make sure you gave each side a fair argument for the sake of your paper.

quote:

Originally posted by wienerschnitzel WTF like inconspicuous said, it was for an argument for the other side. I resent you suggesting i don't care about people near or below the line of poverty, i don't believe i know you. It sounds like this subject is a little personal for you so if that is the case, maybe you should step aside, look at both arguments and make sure you gave each side a fair argument for the sake of your paper.

He's from Red Deer... he has simultaneous Calgary and Edmonton envy!

(yes I'm being an ass)

___________________
Светопресавление
your pearl casting hero