The solution would be to remove ALL traces of socialism. Let them starve out.

You can't breed if you can't eat.

I'm going to have kids, no more than 3, probably 2 I'm going to send them through college and do my best to teach them about life.

Smart people not breeding isn't the solution. I dare to consider myself smart.

WTF?

Aw cmon.

:)

Anyway, this is too simple. I've specialized in finding girls and women who are extraordinarily smart but who come out of families of dopes and retards and people just barely smart enough to live. So some of those retards carry the brightness genes. On the other hand there are many cases where a moron appears in an otherwise normal family. You just never know.

Also, there is my recent broad classification of "morons" as "people who disagree with me" which clearly blurs where I myself sit in all this. I didn't breed, so any of my fuckup nature will not continue on to future generations.

'Will to learn' is a much greater factor in intelligence than genetics.

i think the comparison was between educated and uneducated. stupidity aside.

it's the example the parents have set that makes the difference, not the iq of the cast in question.

and "retard" would be a misnomer my fnf who was exaggerating his point by using that name.

if your mom had you at 15, you'd find that to be normal.

i wonder what the difference in pre parental mortality between the two groups are.
I would think that the uneducated would have a much higher incedence of their last words being: "Hey Y'all! Watch this!"

The bigger problem with the 15 year old parent group, in general, is that their kids often do a good job of preventing the education of the other group. You guys really owe it to yourselves to tour some working class public schools. The number of wasted hours in a day is stunning. Having graduated a couple decades ago, I was not prepared for the illiteracy, laziness, sex, drugs, and violence of the modern middle school. I'm figuring it out but it's a pretty sick society.

You just gave me a flashback Griff.
But the thread of hope is that in that chaos some manage to blossom and break the cycle. Some even amazingly manage to blossom with a baby of their own in tow. Like Bets, she had a baby as a teen, on her own. Graduated, got a gig as a lab tech and did that for years while raising her kid. When her daughter was 12, Bets decided to try for medical school. She got in. This year shes is doing her residency, met a new husband at a softball game along the way and just had a new baby son. I had a beer with her last weekend and learned that her very cool and smart daughter graduates HS this year and is heading to college in Madison.

Government can and should offer hope. Investing in prenatal to 6yr old children- coordinated (#1) health care, early childhood care and education, head start , parent support and education, makes financial sense. Kindergarten is just about too late to get in the game. By 8 years the pattern is taking root. Most parents love their children and want the best. Coordinated services that assist parents and young children can help. Its a smart investment of your tax dollars. This investment would payoff in approximately 20 years with a generally healthier, higher educated, more stable citizenry and workforce. There is some research that has looked at earlychildhood as a longterm investment and the positive financial impact...if anyone cares, I'll see if I can find it.

(another reason I like Dean, he actually talks about this issue)

The most recent research on preschool education shows that it has value to kids from very deprived backgrounds and no value to kids from the rest of society. Unfortunately its the middle class folks who will demand early childhood ed for their kids to shift the costs of child care onto others. This is where I often part ways with the Dems. They like to make their programs universal instead of pin pointing the group with needs. Of course there is always the part where we go from voluntary participation to mandatory participation as well. An out of control public school is the worst place for at risk children.

I can't completely blame the teachers. There are cycles within cycles here. The best way to control behavior is to teach in the zone between boredom and frustration. If the teacher is constantly breaking up fights, she has no chance to put her lesson in play. Ideally you assess, plan, teach, and test repeat... If you miss one step, you've broken the system. One kid can break the system for everybody. Compulsory education is the problem not the solution.

You make a good point with your friend. Sometimes having another life to nurture gives us the focus we need to suceed.

This is part of an email I got this morning from a retired High School teacher in Springfield, MA.

QUOTE:
I went out last night with 3 women who are still teaching, 2 full time in high school, one finishing her doctorate and teaching part time just everywhere. They were SOOOO unhappy and burned out. Worse yet, they WANTED to know that I was happy and live vicariously through me. Does not bode well for the future of public education, I'll tell you. Two of the 3 were at Commerce with me, and Joe and I helped Jenn get out to Longmeadow; Tiesa returned to South Hadley after getting screwed over by Commerce administrators. I KNOW they are 2 of the good, caring, competent ones, and I'm pretty sure Sue is also. Not a pretty picture that they are so miserable.
QUOTE

She feels the lunatics (and their parents) are running the asylum.
:(