Probably just complain loudly about how he pays his premiums and he shouldn't have to put up with that kind of ideologically-compromised healthcare.
Or else he'd complain - loudly - about all the deadbeats getting free health care and being treated before him.
A good number of the people who shop at my grocery use WIC and assorted subsidies to pay for food. Now ... I do get irritated when I have to wait when one of them is trying to buy something that isn't allowed on their program, but on the whole ... it's a good use of tax money.
My theory is that you pay for things now or you pay - and pay more - later. Roads - if you don't maintain them, you'll have to do a major rebuild. People - if they, especially children, aren't well nourished, they're not going to reach their potential. If you don't have decent public education, children are again not going to reach their potential. So pay for this stuff and maybe they'll be able to pay into Social Security to pay into Social Security for you and me.
(gets off soapbox)
It looks like FL went to Obama. 332 to 206.
[link]
If you don't have decent public education, children are again not going to reach their potential. So pay for this stuff and maybe they'll be able to pay into Social Security to pay into Social Security for you and me.
I heard a fantastic podcast from Planet Money last week, about the returns on putting kids in preschool. Two sets of kids from the same neighborhood, born into the same socioeconomic circumstances: one set goes to pre-school where they get socialized, learn their letters, get read to, etc. The other set doesn't. The rest of their educational experience is roughly the same.
Twenty years after the fact, the difference between the two sets of kids is clear. The pre-school kids are significantly more likely to have finished high school or college, significantly less likely to be on unemployment or welfare, to have gotten pregnant as a teenager, to have gotten arrested. Pre-school kids earn more over their lives, pay back more into social security, produce more for society.
It was an amazing report, because the differences were so clear, and the other factors were controlled for. The difference for these lower-income kids was the pre-school.
And did you hear the TAL about sneaking universal pre-K into Oklahoma? It was amazing.
And did you hear the TAL about sneaking universal pre-K into Oklahoma? It was amazing.
No, I keep unsubscribing from TAL because they get backed up and at an hour each, they're too intimidating for me to keep up with.
So I get this email from an acquaintance I have not heard from for awhile. Note: I am not in New York.
Trip here was really fast! But I'll go to Lincoln Center anyway. And
I'll meet you at Shun Lee
My reactions in order:
1. Ooh, that sounds like a nice meal.
2. Damn, I bet that email is not for me.
One of the things that stunned me about Georgia when I moved there was the state commitment to universal preK. It got cut back a bit in the recent budget crunch, and I think is now only 160 days and a shorter day, but anyone who wants preK can go, free. Good investment, Georgia!
(And I totally saw it making a huge difference in how well kids adapted to K, for the low-income kids at our school.)
Here! [link] I like it because it's about a conservative guy who sees the value in investing in kids.
Jesse, NICE and thank you. I am actually on a quest lately to read actual conservatives who don't identify as Tea Party and your link is helpful.
And speaking of links, I searched high and low and all over for a really good non-partisan, easy-to-understand layout of what the government spends money on. I wanted to educate myself. And then I ended up writing a bit of an essay and linking to it on the Book of Face.
[link]
So one of the comments that my super-religious surrogate sister made about the link:
I'm not familiar with the link you provided, but it is endorsed by the VP, WaPo, and NYT, may not be as objective a reports as could be.
So my question is, is there a better link? Not a rhetorical question. I am asking Le Hivemind.
