In response to:

Pre-K Won't Help Kids

S.17 Wrote: Feb 26, 2013 1:06 PM
"It's time to face up to the fact that children are poor mainly because they don't have a father provider-protector, and the problem we should address is the decline in marriage." Maybe. But one could as easily posit that children are poor because their parent(s) have low IQs, IQ is hereditary, and IQ is intractable (which is to say, no amount of "early education" raises it). My grandparents came over from the old country, shirts-on-their-backs-penniless. That's as poor as you can get. Yet my mother became valedictorian of every school she attended. That's IQ. Suffice to say, she's no longer poor. See Real Education: Four Simple Truths for Bringing America's Schools Back to Reality, by Charles Murray
Sarah266 Wrote: Feb 26, 2013 2:54 PM
Maybe it's less just IQ and more that your grandparents realized the importance of education and made sure your mother knew it, too. There are single mother homes where the kids end up well-behaved and hard working. That is because the mother knows the importance of education and raising those children right.
President Obama ended his State of the Union speech on a warm and fuzzy note by calling for pre-K programs for almost all children. The best thing he could do for pre-kindergarten children is to make sure he doesn't hang trillions of dollars of debt around their necks, but that isn't the route he is taking.

Instead, Obama wants to provide government daycare for all preschoolers who live in households where the income is below approximately $47,100. He doesn't call it daycare or babysitting (which is a more accurate term); he calls it early childhood education.

Early childhood education means programs for...