US Bishops' Conference Largely Disappointed by Debt Ceiling Agreement

[Prodigal_Son1]

Ok, here’s an honest question for you. Let’s take a verifiable example.

One can argue that the inner city/urban schools are failing if you look at graduation rates and test scores, despite having more money spent per child than their suburban and rural counterparts. Quite simply, throwing money at the problem hasn’t produced much in the way of measurable results.

How do propose that we fix the problem? It can be said that education is the one of the ways out of poverty.

(Disclaimer, I am not saying cut educational funding, even though you may read it as such)

There’s a lot of factors involved; e.g. drugs, gangs, having to help support families, existing unemployment adding to the competitiveness for jobs, and a plethora of secularism to distract, etc. How all that is combated is anyone’s guess.

It would seem that smaller classrooms would help, with each student receiving more individual attention. Of course, this requires more money. Another approach might be to add vocational classes, or programs through nearby vocational schools offered as part of the school’s curriculum, Hopefully students would find an interest in a trade that can be utilized later in life.

Volunteer programs for high school credit, to help form a willingness to work, might help.

Having Job Corps recruitment before a student is old enough to ‘legally’ drop out. Again, it would cost money, but make it so the recruitment included a monetary bonus for successfully entering the program, upon a successful graduation.

Even the best of programs have much competition for young people growing up with all the distractions there are in life in inner cities and urban areas, and success rates would be limited. Maybe in those situations more adult education programs would be effective as maturity starts to set in.

I’ve answered the best as I could, and admit it’s difficult situation to try and think through, but I would be interested in seeing other proposed solutions.

 

[wynnejj]

At the risk of turning this into another of our endless abortion threads, I will address your ‘reasonable’ assumption. Closing down clinics will make abortion less visible, but since the methods of procurement vary from those requiring a surgical suite to those requiring the four walls of one’s home (not necessarily something those who stand to profit from it will advertise in our present setting), I don’t see that a significant decline in numbers will necessarily follow.

De-funding abortion services might indeed convert abortion services into a home service. However, the liability for botched medical procedures performed in the home would be a real impediment to the growth of this home service.

 

[estesbob]

At the risk of turning this into another of our endless abortion threads, I will address your ‘reasonable’ assumption. Closing down clinics will make abortion less visible, but since the methods of procurement vary from those requiring a surgical suite to those requiring the four walls of one’s home (not necessarily something those who stand to profit from it will advertise in our present setting), I don’t see that a significant decline in numbers will necessarily follow.

Focusing on root causes on the other hand (not that both cannot or should not be done) has the potential to address both moral and social malaise in a more comprehensive and lasting way. My issue with focusing on ending a procedure, is that it does nothing to relieve the social pressures that induce people to such an act. It’s like trying to stop the end of a garden hose with your finger without turning the tap off.

Poverty is at the root of many problems in society but an even greater cause in my opinion is the lack of social cohesiveness which would allow one group to help or to seek help from the other in an enabling manner that promotes stability and strengthens the community. How we got to be the way we are, I’m not sure, but there has to be a balance between self-reliance and community responsibility otherwise everybody loses.

The root cause is it is legal to pay someone to kill your child. The idea that the soultion is to throw enough money at social programs to convince women to quit paying people to kill their chidlren is specious. It is classic extortion-“adopt my political agenda or the children will die”

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

The root cause is it is legal to pay someone to kill your child. The idea that the soultion is to throw enough money at social programs to convince women to quit paying people to kill their chidlren is specious. It is classic extortion-“adopt my political agenda or the children will die”

But, if we approached it from both angles, make abortions illegal and continue social programs for the poor, we might maximize the lives saved by having a percentage of women choosing to avoid the ‘back alley’ abortions. Also, if abortions were illegal, there’s going to be a percentage of single parents struggling to care for a child. It’s not solely a ‘if’ ‘or’ argument.

 

[seekerz]

The root cause is it is legal to pay someone to kill your child. The idea that the soultion is to throw enough money at social programs to convince women to quit paying people to kill their chidlren is specious. It is classic extortion-“adopt my political agenda or the children will die”

I have no clue how you got from abortion and poverty to extortion. And NO, I am not proposing throwing money at a problem. All human behavior has some root cause, abortion included. Legalisation did not cause people to start acting that way, it just made the behavior more open, accepted and perhaps (I’ve not seen evidence one way or another that reliably compares before and after rates) more common.

Addressing the socioeconomic roots is vital simply because people who do not experience respect for life cannot be expected to exhibit it, and failure to act against poverty is one of the most visible manifestations of lack of respect for life.

Acting against poverty does not necessarily mean more money; it may simply mean:

• exercising wisdom in the way money is used, akin to teaching a man to fish instead of giving him a fish (both ways of helping may cost the same but the former is far likely to be long-lasting than the latter)
• exhibiting respect in the way the rest of society (as a whole, and as individuals) views, interacts with and speaks about the poor (to teach respect for life, one has to show it)
  -being good examples in the way the rest of us access, prioritize and use resources (by far, the poor aren’t the only ones who may waste or live beyond their means)

Of course, to be good examples, we cannot insulate ourselves from the poor- we have to live among them, interact with them and bring Christ’s love to them. As challenging as it may be practically to do otherwise, separating ourselves physically, socially and emotionally from the disadvantaged just emphasizes the us-them divisions and in no way facilitates the two sides learning from each other. This is far from being about money, this is about ‘loving’ at arm’s length - no way to build any kind of community. No fixing things by throwing money at them either.

 

[Trader]

There’s a lot of factors involved; e.g. drugs, gangs, having to help support families, existing unemployment adding to the competitiveness for jobs, and a plethora of secularism to distract, etc. How all that is combated is anyone’s guess.

It would seem that smaller classrooms would help, with each student receiving more individual attention. Of course, this requires more money. Another approach might be to add vocational classes, or programs through nearby vocational schools offered as part of the school’s curriculum, Hopefully students would find an interest in a trade that can be utilized later in life.

Volunteer programs for high school credit, to help form a willingness to work, might help.

Having Job Corps recruitment before a student is old enough to ‘legally’ drop out. Again, it would cost money, but make it so the recruitment included a monetary bonus for successfully entering the program, upon a successful graduation.

Even the best of programs have much competition for young people growing up with all the distractions there are in life in inner cities and urban areas, and success rates would be limited. Maybe in those situations more adult education programs would be effective as maturity starts to set in.

I’ve answered the best as I could, and admit it’s difficult situation to try and think through, but I would be interested in seeing other proposed solutions.

Why is it that you left out holding parents accountable for their actions? We already have laws about child support, child abuse, and child neglect, but they are not consistently enforced. I could see a lot of deadbeat fathers jailed on work-release programs as one of the most cost effective social programs possible.

There is an existing model of schools that includes accountablility and consistenly shows better results than public schools in all social classes at lower cost, Catholic schools. And lest you think we are unique, the same can be said of the Lutheran schools where I live.

What does the Church have to say about the education of children?
loveundefiled.blogspot.com/2009/06/where-does-it-say-in-church-documents_09.html

Even programs as popular and well intentioned as free school lunches have problems. They teach children that education and even the feeding of children is mainly the responsibility of the state and not parents. Then the high schools have free day care for the children of students who are raising yet another generation of children who have plenty of reasons not to respect and honor their parents. This was not the approach of Mother Teresa of Calcutta. She always gave food to parents so that the children could see their parents as their providers. It taught children to respect and honor their parents far better than a system of state control.

 

[seekerz]

Why is it that you left out holding parents accountable for their actions? We already have laws about child support, child abuse, and child neglect, but they are not consistently enforced. I could see a lot of deadbeat fathers jailed on work-release programs as one of the most cost effective social programs possible.

There is an existing model of schools that includes accountablility and consistenly shows better results than public schools in all social classes at lower cost, Catholic schools. And lest you think we are unique, the same can be said of the Lutheran schools where I live.

What does the Church have to say about the education of children?
loveundefiled.blogspot.com/2009/06/where-does-it-say-in-church-documents_09.html

Even programs as popular and well intentioned as free school lunches have problems. They teach children that education and even the feeding of children is mainly the responsibility of the state and not parents. Then the high schools have free day care for the children of students who are raising yet another generation of children who have plenty of reasons not to respect and honor their parents. This was not the approach of Mother Teresa of Calcutta. She always gave food to parents so that the children could see their parents as their providers. It taught children to respect and honor their parents far better than a system of state control.

I note (and share) your admiration of Mother Teresa’s giving food to parents so they could provide for their children. That concept could be extended to just about any basic need/skill: education, training, employment…Giving money or material goods can only take people so far, but empowering them to provide for themselves can change whole communities. The problem is that there is a world of difference between empowering parents to provide for their children and cutting them loose to fend for themselves. Not everybody learns how to swim by simply being thrown into the water…

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Why is it that you left out holding parents accountable for their actions? We already have laws about child support, child abuse, and child neglect, but they are not consistently enforced. I could see a lot of deadbeat fathers jailed on work-release programs as one of the most cost effective social programs possible.

It was not intentional. I’ve lived in a rural area for over 30 years now. I asked to see other proposed solutions, and I don’t claim to be a professional on the subject.