So you’d be fine with doing whatever it is Belgium, Finland, and Sweden are doing?
No, its not false, seeing as I was asking if you knew of any programs that did this. While I should have been more specific, I am looking for programs, wrt to funding, that counteract the negative effects of environment and account for the positives available to rich kids. Programs that level the “playing field”. Yes, programs like head start, and free lunch programs do attempt to do that to some extent, but they really don’t do so to any great extent that they are worth mentioning. But for the purposes of this discussion, I accept that people are doing something to address the problem. I feel its not nearly enough though.
Possibly, although the best evidence for what will or won’t work in the United States is what has or hasn’t worked in the United States.
I have no idea what your point is. Here’s what you said:
Do you admit that headstart is an attempt to accomplish something?
Do you admit that headstart is an attempt to counteract something?
Do you admit that headstart is an attempt to counteract something negative?
Do you admit that headstart is an attempt to counteract the negative effects of environment?
And on what basis do you reach that conclusion?
Well, let me just say, that was one interesting article (though I pretty much ignored everything after cadmium!). The racial divide was much starker than I thought…more so than the SES divide (I think, if I’m reading it all correctly), which seems very, very odd, and makes me wonder if nutrition doesn’t pay a larger price than I had assumed.
Anyway, thanks for pointing it out. I found a link to the full report here.
The literature on neurotoxins is, as I’m sure you’re aware, much larger than this one article, but it is a thorough recent review of the topic.
I’m talking about people who aren’t ‘poor’ but are *driven into poverty * by a simple car accident or lingering illness.
Better access to health care, not just emergency care, would benifit the ‘poor’ greatly with doctors educating them about nutrition or at least reliving that ‘stress’ with drugs. (so the drug companies make more money)
People like that exist, to be sure. But – based on my general experience – they are a minority of poor people in the United States.
So I doubt that universal health care would go a long way towards fighting poverty.
Again, I doubt it. A lot of poor people tend to be very difficult to educate.
To the extent that it is a significant cause of long-term poverty? No, it is not safe to assume that. Again, please provide a cite.
Nope, sorry - not accepting any hand-waving right now. You made a claim, prove it.
What evidence do you have that these exposures are high enough and widely-distributed enough that they form a significant cause of long-term chronic poverty?
First you have to establish your point. Then I will come to grips with it.
You made a claim - that environmental toxins were a major cause of long-term poverty, and that those toxins were caused by locating factories in poor neighborhoods. Please provide the evidence for this claim.
Regards,
Shodan
I reiterate that I never made any such claim. Cite any place that I did.
I did say that neurotoxins are a cause of neurological deficit. They are more prevalent in poor areas, and are thus a risk factor for later failure that the poor are exposed to at greater rates.
They are not “a major cause of long term poverty,” they are one of many risk factors. Your repeated attempts to put words in my mouth are a transparent and deceitfut attempt at distraction. They are also your m.o.
Well, I suppose this is as close as you can get to admitting you don’t have the evidence.
Regards,
Shodan
There is no ‘magic bullet’ for poverty. No one thing, even better education, will erase poverty. I don’t even think it is possible to erase poverty. The real question is, what are the non-poor willing to do for them. What is their obligation to the poor?
It’s quite simple to go round the mulberry bush with you. Here’s where I’ve already refuted this false claim of yours.
Other people seem to grasp this. What neurotoxins were you exposed to as a child?
Actually, I think Shodan has the better of this argument so far. The best you’ve come up with, apparently, is evidence that poor people tend to have higher amounts of lead in their systems. However, it doesn’t follow that this is the result of poor people living in greater proximity to lead emitting industry.
Another explanation (and probably a more likely one) is that poor people are more likely to be exposed to lead from paint in their residences.
Don’t sweat it, brazil84. Once Hentor starts making insults in GD, it means he hasn’t got anything else.
A quick Google reveals that you are correct - the cut off is 75, not 80 (as I thought).
Then I would guess the strategy on how to address poverty caused would be affected by things like [ul][li]how much IQ can be affected in adulthood[]are there enough jobs around that a person in the dull normal range can do[]how much do those jobs pay[*]how responsive are such people to social pressures of the sort I was recommending.[/ul]Another issue would be, how responsible are these folks for their own situation? If IQ in adults can’t be changed significantly, then we may have to resolve ourselves to the idea that some people will always be poor. That would be addressed by the Norplant-as-a-condition-of-welfare idea, so that they aren’t going to have (more) children than they can support even if they aren’t bright enough to see why this is a good idea. [/li]
I suspect this might bog down into a eugenics debate.
Regards,
Shodan
So, your plan is new residences, repaint them, or shrug and ignore?
I don’t have a plan, but I do believe it is proper for governments to have lead paint abatement programs in place. For example, every child in my town is regularly tested for lead. If a child’s lead level is above some threshold, it triggers an investigation, which typically leads to the homeowner being forced to have lead paint removed from his or her home. Such programs have been in place for many years.
Please refrain from feeding other posters insults in GD.
[ /Moderating ]
I provided a nice comprehensive summary of the links between toxins and neurological deficits. That means that exposure to toxins causes cognitive problems. These toxins are higher among those in poor areas. I’ve already said that, for the purposes of this “debate” it doesn’t really matter how they got there.
Would you care to cite the relative amounts from various sources (factories/paint/proximity to highways), if it matters at all where they came from? Can we all agree that the poor are not emitting these themselves?
There are, of course, some things that are more offensive than insults.