A Bad Idea That Refuses to Die
show comments
  • Fat_Man

    Why is that there is no comprehension among some liberal policy advocates of the enormous gap between the programs we have in place and our ability to pay for them, or the implications of that gap for our ability to fund their hobby horses?

    • Corlyss Drinkard

      I’ve been wondering that about gun control for 20 years. Never seems to make even a dent in their sincere but limited grasp of public policy that increased legislation in that area will not improve anything. Look at the hysteria associated with the failure of their latest effort. No amount of explaining to them that the proposed provisions would not have prevented a single child’s death at Newtown impresses them at all. All they see is the Evil NRA, not the millions of licensed and law abiding gun owners behind the NRA. One would have more success talking to a brick wall.

  • Andrew Allison

    The suggestion that a single irresponsible caregiver is reason for the expenditure of more government money that we don’t have is about as rational as the AGW alarmist’s assertion that an individual weather event is “proof” positive.

  • Jim Luebke

    You know, one caregiver for three kids doesn’t mean much improvement in the efficiency of the overall economy, compared to moms just taking care of their own kids.

    If moms take care of their own kids, you’re also more likely to get above-average performers (about half the time, or should be). If raising kids is paid work, (government or otherwise) you have low-performers doing the bulk of the work, with high performers only available to the fraction of the population who can afford those sorts of salaries.

    The efficiency numbers just don’t lean towards this as being more than a marginal improvement in the economy, considering that if you have high performers raising the kids, they’re more likely to become high performers themselves.

  • Nature has created a hard to beat day care operator, aka a mother (or a father). The overwhelming majority — probably 90% — of children from low- to moderate-income families needing publicly financed day care are children of “single moms.” The solution to this and so many other purported problems is marriage.

    My maternal grandparents, born circa 1870, were dirt poor Irish in a craggy corner of the Dingle peninsula. Grandpa was an illiterate fisherman who spoke only Irish and a few English phrases. They married in 1891, had their first child late that year and their last (of 15 born) in 1916. None ever needed “day care,” most attended a two room crude schoolhouse, all as adults made their way to America, married and had children themselves. None ever divorced. None of the 28 grandchildren became a criminal and all were at least moderately successful by 20th century American standards.

    I don’t contend that every group in contemporary America can easily follow a similar path. However, I do contend that if grandma and grandpa had never married and grandma had borne children by three men, they would all have been totally screwed.

    • Add to that grandparents, siblings, aunts, uncles, etc. How on Earth did humans get by for tens of thousands of years without unionized daycare providers?

  • “This is just one story among many illustrating the desperate need for federally funded child care. . .”

    Or for a six-hour day, which might be an even better idea. If you get my drift.

  • Corlyss Drinkard

    Couldn’t disagree more with the Big Government advocates at New Republic. Neither federal law nor federal money will stop the employment of stupid people either too young or too irresponsible to hold positions of trust.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.