>
>For the type of education you
>are talking about.

Maybe I'm not explaining myself correctly, but I don't see what was so special about what I was talking about. To put it simply, inner city and rural public schools should have the same resources and educational opportunities that suburban schools do. Classes in English, Social Studies, Science and the arts (which I did mention ed in my previous post as being cut on the regular) when taught correctly can expose students to lives and ways of thinking different from the ones they're living in.


>In your typical rural school, who
>often have it much worse
>in terms of resources than
>inner city schools, they don't
>have that option. If
>they have to choose between
>art and football, they are
>going with football.
>

Well that's the problem I've always had with the public school system, unequal funding.


>Basically the welfare mentality is a
>non-issue. In essence it
>blames the victim for their
>state. No amount of
>hustle, thriftiness, desire is going
>to change Nickerson Gardens into
>Brentwood. Of course there
>is some element of personal
>choice that affect the lives
>of individuals, but those same
>choices are made by folks
>in a higher tax bracket
>but don't have the same
>devastating effects. It is
>very easy to want to
>change the values of poor
>people (who have the same
>values of people of other
>classes) to fix the problem.
> But when it comes
>to real long term solutions
>for resource poor regions, it's
>not the victims of poverty
>who can solve the problem.
>

I agree with this, I just think that some (notice I said some) people can improve their situations themselves to a degree. Of course
there's is no switch that someone can pull that makes poor people suddenly middle class without
help from outside sources.

>
>The people in the inner-city who
>lived in working blue collar
>neighborhoods were hurt more by
>the movement out of big
>business than any CIA sponsored
>crack operation. Crack has had
>a huge effect on black
>neighborhoods. Almost the same
>way Meth is having an
>impact on white rural areas.
>
I agree 100%, especially since I came from one of those areas (East Orange, NJ).

>The macro elements of American society
>are more damaging to poor
>communities.

You're right, but unfortunately I don't have any faith in the macro elements of American society to fix the problems. If we don't figure out a way to fix them ourselves, through creating our own system or manipulating the current one to our advantage, things aren't going to change.

Shaun G.